From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bryan v. Rousseau

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1874
71 N.C. 194 (N.C. 1874)

Opinion

(June Term, 1874.)

In an action upon a bond, the sum demanded is the penalty of the bond, and not the damages claimed for the breach thereof:

Therefore, where the penalty of the bond exceeds two hundred dollars, suit cannot be brought before a Justice of the Peace.

CIVIL ACTION against the defendant, Rousseau, as County Treasurer of Wilkes County, commenced in a Justice's Court, from whence it was carried by appeal to the Superior Court of WILKES, where it was tried before Mitchell, J., at Spring Term, 1874.

Armfield Folk, for defendants.

Furches, for plaintiff.


The facts, so far as are necessary to an understanding of the opinion, are as follows:

This action was begun before a Justice of the Peace against the defendant, Rousseau, Treasurer of Wilkes County, and the sureties upon his official bond for the year 1870. It was admitted that Rousseau was the treasurer, and the execution of the bond by himself and the defendants as his sureties, in the sum of $12,000 was also admitted.

The action was brought upon a county order for $125.80, which was the sum claimed for damages by reason of the breach of the bond.


The State on the relation of Fell v. Porter, 69 N.C. 140, is decisive of this case. It is there held that if the action is on a bond the penalty of which exceeds two hundred dollars, the penalty of the bond is the sum demanded, although the damages claimed for the breach thereof, is less than two hundred dollars. Such is the construction put upon the Constitution, Art. 4, Secs. 13, 33; and (195) Bat. Rev., Chap. 80, Sec. 13, cannot have the effect of changing the jurisdiction of the Courts, as fixed by the Constitution. It follows that this action, having been brought on a penal bond for the sum of twelve thousand dollars, before a Justice of the Peace, ought to have been dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM. Judgment reversed and action dismissed.

Cited: Morris v. Saunders, 85 N.C. 140; Coggins v. Harrell, 86 N.C. 320; Joyner v. Roberts, 112 N.C. 114; Machine Co. v. Seago, 128 N.C. 161.


Summaries of

Bryan v. Rousseau

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1874
71 N.C. 194 (N.C. 1874)
Case details for

Bryan v. Rousseau

Case Details

Full title:STATE ON THE RELATION OF R. B. BRYAN v. A. L. ROUSSEAU AND G. H. BROWN

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1874

Citations

71 N.C. 194 (N.C. 1874)

Citing Cases

Morris v. Saunders

As the holder of such bond has no option but to take judgment for the full penalty, to be discharged upon the…

Machine Co. v. Seago

Justice MERRIMON, who wrote the opinion in Stafford v. Jones, and Chief Justice SMITH were both on the bench…