Hill v. Stansbury, 668.
| Docket Nº | No. 668. |
| Citation | 224 N.C. 356, 30 S.E.2d 150 |
| Case Date | May 24, 1944 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
30 S.E.2d 150
224 N.C. 356
HILL et al.
v.
STANSBURY et al.
No. 668.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
May 24, 1944.
[30 S.E.2d 150]
Appeal from Superior Court, Guilford County; H. Hoyle Sink, Judge.
Action by Thomas J. Hill and others against George L. Stansbury and others, Commissioners of Guilford County, to recover for benefit of county certain public funds allegedly unlawfully expended, wherein a consent judgment for plaintiffs was entered. From an order directing that named petitioner be reimbursed for expenses and that his attorneys be compensated in specified amount, defendant Commissioners and Guilford County appeal.
Error.
The plaintiffs, citizens and taxpayers of Guilford County, brought this action, together with two others, reported in 221 N.C. 339, 340, 20 S.E.2d 308, and 223 N. C. 193, 25 S.E.2d 604, under authority of G.S. § 128-10, formerly C.S. § 3206, to recover of defendants, County Commissioners, for the benefit of Guilford County, on account of public funds unlawfully expended, etc., the plaintiffs disclaiming any right personally to participate in the recovery.
Judgment was finally awarded the plaintiffs, for and on behalf of the county, in the sum of $16,396.51. Both sides noted an appeal, which they later abandoned. and entered consent judgment dismissing the appeals before the Resident Judge of the Twelfth Judicial District at chambers on 18 September, 1943. The amount of the judgment was thereupon paid to the Clerk of the Superior Court of Guilford County.
Thereafter the plaintiff, Thomas J. Hill, filed petition before the Resident Judge of the District requesting that he be reimbursed for expenses and counsel fees. After notice to the county attorney and county commissioners, an order was made by the Resident Judge on 15 October, 1943, directing that the petitioner be paid out of the funds derived from the judgment in this case, the sum of $460.65, and that his attorneys be compensated out of said funds in the amount of $3000.
By permission (similar to that granted in the case of Moreland v. Wamboldt, 208 N.C. 35, 179 S.E. 9), Guilford County and the Commissioners of Guilford County prosecute this appeal from the order, assigning errors.
Brooks, McLendon & Holderness, York & Boyd, and Andrew Joyner, Jr., all of Greensboro, for plaintiffs, appellees.
Thomas C. Hoyle and Hines & Boren, all of Greensboro, for defendants, appellants.
STACY, Chief Justice.
It is provided by G.S. § 128-10, formerly C.S. § 3206, that the citizen...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Perkins, COA20-572
...dismissing the petition as moot is a nullity itself, because it was predicated on what became a nullity, see, e.g., Hill v. Stansbury, 224 N.C. 356, 357, 30 S.E.2d 150, 151 (1944) ("Where there is a want of jurisdiction [] over . . . the process, it is the same as if there were no court. Pr......
-
State Distrib. Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co, 453.
...329, 190 S.E. 478; Shepard v. Leonard, 223 N.C. 110, 25 S.E.2d 445. "It is the same as if there were no court." Hill v. Stansbury, N.C, 30 S.E.2d 150; City of Monroe v. Niven, 221 N.C. 362, 20 S.E.2d 311. An agreed statement of facts "is equivalent to a special verdict, and the judge may re......
-
State Distributing Corporation v. Travelers Indem. Co., 453.
...329, 190 S.E. 478; Shepard v. Leonard, 223 N.C. 110, 25 S.E.2d 445. "It is the same as if there were no court." Hill v. Stansbury, N.C., 30 S.E.2d 150; City of Monroe v. Niven, 221 N.C. 362, 20 S.E.2d 311. An agreed statement of facts "is equivalent to a special verdict, and the judge may r......
-
Quevedo v. Deans, 674
...challenge in this action is well settled by the decisions of this Court. Powell v. Turpin, 224 N.C. 67, 29 S.E.2d 26; Hill v. Stansbury, 224 N.C. 356, 30 S.E.2d 150; City of Monroe v. Niven, 221 N.C. 362, 20 S.E.2d While it is true that one who buys at a judicial sale is required only to lo......
-
State v. Perkins, COA20-572
...dismissing the petition as moot is a nullity itself, because it was predicated on what became a nullity, see, e.g., Hill v. Stansbury, 224 N.C. 356, 357, 30 S.E.2d 150, 151 (1944) ("Where there is a want of jurisdiction [] over . . . the process, it is the same as if there were no court. Pr......
-
State Distrib. Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co, 453.
...329, 190 S.E. 478; Shepard v. Leonard, 223 N.C. 110, 25 S.E.2d 445. "It is the same as if there were no court." Hill v. Stansbury, N.C, 30 S.E.2d 150; City of Monroe v. Niven, 221 N.C. 362, 20 S.E.2d 311. An agreed statement of facts "is equivalent to a special verdict, and the judge may re......
-
State Distributing Corporation v. Travelers Indem. Co., 453.
...329, 190 S.E. 478; Shepard v. Leonard, 223 N.C. 110, 25 S.E.2d 445. "It is the same as if there were no court." Hill v. Stansbury, N.C., 30 S.E.2d 150; City of Monroe v. Niven, 221 N.C. 362, 20 S.E.2d 311. An agreed statement of facts "is equivalent to a special verdict, and the judge may r......
-
Quevedo v. Deans, 674
...challenge in this action is well settled by the decisions of this Court. Powell v. Turpin, 224 N.C. 67, 29 S.E.2d 26; Hill v. Stansbury, 224 N.C. 356, 30 S.E.2d 150; City of Monroe v. Niven, 221 N.C. 362, 20 S.E.2d While it is true that one who buys at a judicial sale is required only to lo......