Bank v. . Commissioners

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Bank v. . Commissioners

47 S.E. 1016, 135 N.C. 230

DecidedMay 3, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 47 S.E. 1016 (Bank v. . Commissioners) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank v. . Commissioners, 47 S.E. 1016, 135 N.C. 230 (N.C. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

The facts in this case are substantially the same as in Jones v. Comrs.,135 N.C. 218, the only difference being that the plaintiff here alleges that he holds $722 of the scrip issued by the county for necessary expenses and for which he wishes county bonds, and in Jones v. Comrs. the plaintiff held bonds which are not yet due but which he wished refunded in new bonds. Whatever distinction this may make in the rights of the plaintiff, if any, our decision in Jones v. Comrs. is not based upon such difference, but upon the fact that chapter 289, Laws 1903, is not mandatory, and places the issuance of bonds in the discretion of the board of county commissioners, who are merely "authorized and empowered" to make such issue.

For the reasons given in that case the judgment herein, which peremptorily orders bonds issued to the plaintiff, is likewise

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The facts in this case are substantially the same as in Jones v. Comrs.,135 N.C. 218, the only difference being that the plaintiff here alleges that he holds $722 of the scrip issued by the county for necessary expenses and for which he wishes county bonds, and in Jones v. Comrs. the plaintiff held bonds which are not yet due but which he wished refunded in new bonds. Whatever distinction this may make in the rights of the plaintiff, if any, our decision in Jones v. Comrs. is not based upon such difference, but upon the fact that chapter 289, Laws 1903, is not mandatory, and places the issuance of bonds in the discretion of the board of county commissioners, who are merely "authorized and empowered" to make such issue.

For the reasons given in that case the judgment herein, which peremptorily orders bonds issued to the plaintiff, is likewise

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 S.E. 1016, 135 N.C. 230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-v-commissioners-nc-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack