State v. Sluder

4 Citing cases

  1. State v. Jacobs

    44 N.C. 218 (N.C. 1853)   Cited 3 times

    Where by a private act of Assembly abolishing jury trials in the County Courts of Richmond County, no provision was made for removing from said court to the Superior Court, cases where free Negroes were charged with unlawfully migrating into this State, the proper course under the act of 1836 (section 8, chapter 1, Revised Statutes), would be to remove the same by writ of certiorari to the Superior Court for trial: Held, however, that the removal of such case by consent of parties, dispensed with the necessity of a certiorari, and gave the court jurisdiction. (The case of S. v. Sluder, 30 N.C. 487, cited and approved.) THE defendant was arrested upon a warrant sued out by order of the County Court of Richmond County, at its July Term, 1851, and charged as a free person of color with having migrated into this State, and having failed to depart the same within twenty days, (219) after having been duly notified so to do, contrary to the provisions of the act of Assembly (Rev. Stat., chap. 111, sec. 65, 66, 67).

  2. Buchanan v. McKenzie

    53 N.C. 95 (N.C. 1860)

    The reply is obvious: Wherever issues of fact are made up the case must be transmitted to the superior courts, as in the case of the probate of wills, or after issues are made up on proceedings under a ca. sa., or in a bastardy case, the principle being that where, by law, a matter is to originate in the county court, that court has exclusive jurisdiction in the first instance, notwithstanding its jurisdiction for trying issues of fact is taken away by statute; and it is only after issues of fact are made up that the case is to be transmitted to the Superior Court by order of the county court or by certiorari. See the case of Harris v. Hampton, 52 N.C. 597, in which S. v. Sluder, 30 N.C. 487, and Fox v. Wood, 33 N.C. 213, are referred to, and the question in regard to nonjury county courts is fully explained. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

  3. Harriss v. Hampton

    52 N.C. 597 (N.C. 1860)   Cited 1 times

    In either case the suit must, by the express words of the act, originate in the Superior Court of the county of Rutherford. S. v. Sluder, 30 N.C. 487, and Fox v. Wood, 33 N.C. 213, to which we are referred by the plaintiff's counsel, so far from militating against, actually confirms the construction which we put upon the acts. The first was a case of bastardy and the second of a ca. sa., and they were held to be properly returnable to the county court, in the first instance, because they were cases that did not require "the intervention of a jury as a matter of course."

  4. Fox v. Wood

    33 N.C. 213 (N.C. 1850)   Cited 2 times

    Proceedings in bastardy are returnable to the County Court, and if an issue is made up it is taken to the Superior Court by certiorari. S. v. Sluder, 30 N.C. 487. The same principle governs this case.