Hess, Rogers Co. v. . Brower

76 N.C. 428
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 5, 1877
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 76 N.C. 428 (Hess, Rogers Co. v. . Brower) 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
Hess, Rogers Co. v. . Brower, 76 N.C. 428 (N.C. 1877).

Opinion

Bynum, J.

We think the affidavit is sufficient though mot as full and explicit as it in caution should have been *429 made. It states a fact accomplished, to-wit; that the defendant has departed from the State and then concludes-with the averment that it was with the intent to avoid the service of a summons as the affiant is informed and believes. It is not always convenient or prudent to state the source of one’s information in the affidavit, yet it may he a sufficient ground of belief to authorize the Clerk to issue the warrant. of attachment. If the affiant in point of fact had received no such information and had no reasonable grounds for his. belief we see no reason why he could not be indicted for perjury in this particular. We think the affidavit is in substantial compliance with C. C. P. § 201. Love v. Young, 69 N. C. 65. Hughes v. Person, 63 N. C. 548. There is error-judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for further-proceedings according to law.

Per Curiaii. Judgment reversed..

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

Related

Bethell v. . Lee
158 S.E. 493 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Weaver v. . Roberts
84 N.C. 493 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1881)
State Ex Rel. Peebles v. Foote
83 N.C. 102 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 N.C. 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hess-rogers-co-v-brower-nc-1877.