From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCall v. Zachary

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 1, 1899
34 S.E. 962 (N.C. 1899)

Opinion

(Decided 21 November, 1899.)

Quo Warranto — Solicitor — Title to Office — Madison County.

THE plaintiff sues for the office of solicitor of Criminal Court (250) of Madison County, and at July Term, 1899, of the Superior Court of MADISON County, judgment was rendered in his favor by Coble, J. Defendant appealed.

George A. Shuford for appellant.

V. S. Lusk and Frank Carter for appellee.


The decision of this cause, according to the opinion, is governed by the judgment in McCall v. Webb, at this term.

CLARK, J., dissents.


We have carefully examined the facts of this case and find them to be substantially the same as those in McCall v. Webb, at this term. This being so, the opinion of the Court in that case must govern our judgment in this case.

The plaintiff is therefore entitled to the office sued for, it being the solicitorship of the Criminal Court of Madison County, and to the fees and emoluments thereof; and the defendant, Zachary, is not entitled to the same, nor to the fees and emoluments of said office. Let the writ issue as prayed for.

Affirmed.

CLARK, J., dissents for reason given in the dissenting opinions in McCall v. Webb and Abbott v. Beddingfield, at this term.

Overruled: Mial v. Ellington, 134 N.C. 131.

(251)


Summaries of

McCall v. Zachary

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 1, 1899
34 S.E. 962 (N.C. 1899)
Case details for

McCall v. Zachary

Case Details

Full title:STATE ON THE RELATION OF R. S. McCALL v. W. W. ZACHARY

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Nov 1, 1899

Citations

34 S.E. 962 (N.C. 1899)
125 N.C. 249

Citing Cases

McCall v. Zachary

The plaintiff was the duly elected solicitor of Madison County Criminal Court, but the defendant, under an…