Latham v. . Harris

139 S.E. 773, 194 N.C. 802, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 237
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 26, 1927·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*803 Pee Cueiam.

Plaintiffs, by this action to restrain and enjoin defendant, sheriff of Beaufort County, from enforcing a criminal statute in said county, seek to present for decision the question as to the constitutionality of the statute. It has been repeatedly held that this cannot be done. Moore v. Bell, 191 N. C., 305, and cases therein cited. There are no sufficient allegations in the complaint that property rights of plaintiffs are or will be affected by the enforcement of the statute to bring the action within the principle recently restated in Angelo v. City of Winston-Salem, 193 N. C., 207.

The temporary restraining order was improvidently made. The judgment dissolving this order and dismissing the action is

Affirmed.

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

Latham v. . Harris, 139 S.E. 773, 194 N.C. 802, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 237 (N.C. 1927).

139 S.E. 773 (Latham v. . Harris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jarrell v. . Snow
35 S.E.2d 273 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)