Hamlin v. Neighbors
75 N.C. 66
Opinion
If the’ exeeutor, Hamlin, when he applied to be made party plaintiff, had filed a petition' and shown a proper case, he might have been permitted under the authority of Mason v. Osgood, 71 N. C. Rep., 212, to continue the suit in forma pauperis. But, as he did not do that, then under the authority of Osbo'i'ne v. Henry, 66 N. C. Rep., 354, he ought to have been required to give a prosecution bond.
There is error. Let -this be certified.
Pee,- Cubiam. Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hamlin v. Neighbors, 75 N.C. 66 (N.C. 1876).
75 N.C. 66 (Hamlin v. Neighbors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Christian v. . R. R.
48 S.E. 743 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)
Christian v. Railroad Co.
136 N.C. 321 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)