Board of Commissioners v. Thorn

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Board of Commissioners v. Thorn

23 S.E. 184, 117 N.C. 211

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 5, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 S.E. 184 (Board of Commissioners v. Thorn) 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

Board of Commissioners v. Thorn, 23 S.E. 184, 117 N.C. 211 (N.C. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Faircloth, C. J.:

The Act of 1895, Oh. 303, appointed the defendants “to locate the county line between Ala-mance . and Chatham counties according to the original survey of 1770 establishing the county of Chatham,” and provided for the expenses in certain contingencies. Whilst the defendants were engaged in their duties they were restrained from proceeding further on the allegation that they were not locating the line correctly and according to the direction in the said Acts of Assembly. Upon the final hearing the Judge below vacated the restraining order and refused to grant an injunction and the plaintiffs, commissioners of Chatham county, appealed. The main argument before us was upon a construction of the words “according to the original survey of 1770 establishing the county of Chatham,” in said Act of 1895, in its connection with the other said Act, and certain questions of evidence. We find ourselves unable to respond to the argument or to give a construction to said Acts, because the Court is without jurisdiction in the matter. Alamance County is not a party to this action and would not be bound by any conclusion or order of the Court, and the defendants have no official interest in the controversy. They are simply the agents of the Legislature to execute its command. The plaintiffs allege that if the lines are located as now being run by the defendants, Chatham county will sustain an irreparable damage,- that is, it would lose territory and financial support, and ask for an injunction on that ground. *218 That conclusion is not sound. Counties are laid out and the boundaries established as directed by the Legislature and these boundaries exist at the will of the Legislature, subject to be changed at any time by it, and this is well understood in the organization of the same ; otherwise, new counties could not be established nor any sub-divisions had unless consented to by the original corporate bodies. So, no injunction can rest upon the idea of irreparable damage. And there is no equitable ground on which to rest an interference of the Court by an injunction for the reasons above stated.

We are of the opinion that his Honor committed no erro r.

Judgment Affirmed.

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

Faircloth, C. J.:

The Act of 1895, Oh. 303, appointed the defendants “to locate the county line between Ala-mance . and Chatham counties according to the original survey of 1770 establishing the county of Chatham,” and provided for the expenses in certain contingencies. Whilst the defendants were engaged in their duties they were restrained from proceeding further on the allegation that they were not locating the line correctly and according to the direction in the said Acts of Assembly. Upon the final hearing the Judge below vacated the restraining order and refused to grant an injunction and the plaintiffs, commissioners of Chatham county, appealed. The main argument before us was upon a construction of the words “according to the original survey of 1770 establishing the county of Chatham,” in said Act of 1895, in its connection with the other said Act, and certain questions of evidence. We find ourselves unable to respond to the argument or to give a construction to said Acts, because the Court is without jurisdiction in the matter. Alamance County is not a party to this action and would not be bound by any conclusion or order of the Court, and the defendants have no official interest in the controversy. They are simply the agents of the Legislature to execute its command. The plaintiffs allege that if the lines are located as now being run by the defendants, Chatham county will sustain an irreparable damage,- that is, it would lose territory and financial support, and ask for an injunction on that ground. *218 That conclusion is not sound. Counties are laid out and the boundaries established as directed by the Legislature and these boundaries exist at the will of the Legislature, subject to be changed at any time by it, and this is well understood in the organization of the same ; otherwise, new counties could not be established nor any sub-divisions had unless consented to by the original corporate bodies. So, no injunction can rest upon the idea of irreparable damage. And there is no equitable ground on which to rest an interference of the Court by an injunction for the reasons above stated.

We are of the opinion that his Honor committed no erro r.

Judgment Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 S.E. 184, 117 N.C. 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-commissioners-v-thorn-nc-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack