Taylor v. Harris

Decision Date31 January 1880
Citation82 N.C. 25
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesJOHN TAYLOR v. GEORGE HARRIS.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

CIVIL ACTION, tried at Spring Term, 1879, of NEW HANOVER Superior Court, before Seymour, J.

The action was brought to fall term, 1878, which began on Monday the 2d day of December, 1878. The summons was served on Thursday the 21st day of November, 1878; and the defendant contended that the summons was not served ten days before said term, and that the spring term was therefore the appearance term. The court held that the service was in time for fall term, 1878, and ruled the defendant to trial, to which he excepted. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, upon which judgment was rendered, and the defendant appealed.

Messrs. Junius Davis and A. T. & J. London, for plaintiff .

Mr. J. D. Bellamy, jr., for defendant .

ASHE, J.

In computing the time required by law for a summons to be served before the beginning of a term of the superior court, we must be governed not by the Code of Civil Procedure, whose provisions in regard to the service and return of summons are not now in force, but by the act of 1870-'71, ch. 42, by which the Code has been suspended in these and other particulars.

That act provides that “the officer to whom the summons is addressed, shall note on it the day of delivery to him and shall execute it at least ten days before the beginning of the term to which it is returnable, and shall return it on the first day of the term.” This language, it will be seen, is substantially the same with that of section 50, chapter 31, of the Revised Code, which reads, “all writs, &c., shall, unless otherwise directed, be returned the first day of the term to which the same shall be returnable, and shall be executed at least ten days before the beginning of the term when returnable to the superior court, and at least five days when returnable to the county court.” So far as relates to writs returnable to the county courts, this court in construing the last mentioned act held that the service of a writ returnable to the county court, on the Wednesday preceding the beginning of a court, would be in time for that term. Drake v. Fletcher, 5 Jones, 410. Applying the same principle to writs returnable to superior courts, their service on Friday, the tenth day before court, would be in apt time for the next court, and the two acts being so similar in language must bear the same construction.

It has been the uniform construction, so far as we are...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Haehl v. The Wabash Railroad Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 23, 1893
    ...White v. Ins. Co., 15 Neb. 660; Charles v. Stansbury, 3 Johns. 261; In re Carhart, 2 Dem. 627; Taylor v. Corbiere, 8 How. Pr. 385; Taylor v. Harris, 82 N.C. 25; Marks v. Russell, 40 Pa. St. 372; Duffy v. Ogden, 64 Pa. St. 240. (2) There was no evidence that the killing of Haehl was wrongful......
  • Donald v. Commercial Bank of Magee
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • July 2, 1923
    ...178; Beckwith v. Douglas, 25 Kan. 229; Pollard v. Yoder, 9 Ky. (2 A. K. Marsh), 264; Ogden v. Redman, 10 Ky. (3 A. K. Marsh), 234; Taylor v. Harris, 82 N.C. 25; Bartow v. Abbe, 16 Ohio 408; Black v. 68 Pa. (18 P. F. Smith) 83; Buist v. Mitchell, 8 Briv. 485; Dickinson v. Lee, 42 Tenn. (2 Co......
  • State v. Ga. Co
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 10, 1891
    ...the beginning of the term, " for service before midnight of Friday, the tenth day before court, has always been held sufficient. Tavlor v. Harris, 82 N. C. 25. We do not think that the defendant, when served by publication, is entitled to 10 days in addition to the four weeks. The publicati......
  • Harris v. Latta
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 6, 1979
    ...days. Pettit v. Trailer Co., 214 N.C. 335, 199 S.E. 279 (1938); Guilford v. Georgia Co., 109 N.C. 310, 13 S.E. 861 (1891); Taylor v. Harris, 82 N.C. 25 (1880); Beasley v. Downey, 32 N.C. 284 (1849); 86 C.J.S. Time, § 13(1); Annot., 98 A.L.R.2d 1331, § 3 (1964); Cf. Rule 6(a), Rules of Civil......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT