Zachary v. . Holden

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Zachary v. . Holden

47 N.C. 453

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedAugust 5, 1855

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 47 N.C. 453 (Zachary v. . Holden) 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

Zachary v. . Holden, 47 N.C. 453 (N.C. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

Peaeson, J.

Allen v. Greenlee, 2 Dev. 370, is a direct authority in support of the decision made in the Court below.

The same principle is applied to a converse state of facts, Rodgers v. Pitman, 2 Jones 56. The two cases settle the rule to be, that where process is valid and sued out maliciously, the proper action is case; where the process is void, as for *454 want of jurisdiction, the proper action is trespass vi eb a/rmis or trover.

Pee CueiaM. Judgment affirmed.

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

Peaeson, J.

Allen v. Greenlee, 2 Dev. 370, is a direct authority in support of the decision made in the Court below.

The same principle is applied to a converse state of facts, Rodgers v. Pitman, 2 Jones 56. The two cases settle the rule to be, that where process is valid and sued out maliciously, the proper action is case; where the process is void, as for *454 want of jurisdiction, the proper action is trespass vi eb a/rmis or trover.

Pee CueiaM. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 N.C. 453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zachary-v-holden-nc-1855.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack