Webb v. Port Commission of Morehead City
Decision Date | 10 January 1934 |
Docket Number | 272. |
Parties | WEBB v. PORT COMMISSION OF MOREHEAD CITY et al. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Carteret County; Frizzelle, Judge.
Controversy without action between W. M. Webb, on behalf of himself and all other residents and taxpayers of the Town of Morehead City, and the Port Commission, Mayor, and Board of Commissioners of such town. From a judgment for the latter parties, Webb appeals.
Affirmed.
This is a controversy without action submitted to the superior court of Carteret county by the parties thereto, in accordance with the provisions of C. S. § 626.
The cause was heard by his honor, J. Paul Frizzelle, judge holding the courts of the Fifth judicial district, at his chambers, in the town of Snow Hill, N. C., on 23d day of September, 1933, on an agreed statement of facts which is duly verified as required by the statute.
The agreed statement of facts, together with the questions of law in difference between the parties, which arise upon said facts, are substantially as follows:
1. The Port Commission of Morehead City is a corporation created by the General Assembly of North Carolina, by statute duly enacted at its regular session in 1933. Chapter 75, Private Laws of North Carolina, Session 1933. The members of said commission have been duly appointed, and have duly organized by the election of a chairman, secretary, and treasurer, as required by said act. The said commission is now engaged in the performance of its duties as imposed by the act of the General Assembly, and in the exercise of its powers as conferred by said act.
2. Section 2 of said act is as follows:
3. The Port Commission of Morehead City has filed with the Public Works Administration, at Washington, D. C., an application for a loan with which to provide funds for acquiring, constructing, maintaining, and/or operating terminal and terminal facilities at Morehead City, and is proposing to issue bonds and/or other securities or obligations for the purpose of procuring said loan. The bonds when so issued are to be denominated "Port Commission Bonds of Morehead City," and are to be issued in such form and denominations, and will mature at such time or times, not exceeding fifty years from their date, and will bear interest at such rate, not exceeding 6 per cent. per annum, as the said port commission may determine, with the approval of the Public Works Administration, and not inconsistent with chapter 75, Private Laws of North Carolina, Session 1933. The bonds are to be signed by the chairman of said port commission, and shall have affixed thereto or impressed thereon the corporate seal of said commission, attested by its secretary. The coupons to be attached to said bonds will bear the facsimile signature of the chairman of said commission, officiating at the time of the issuance of said bonds. It is proposed that the said commission shall sell said bonds at private sale, for not less than par, to the Public Works Administration or other governmental agency; and that if such sale be not made to such governmental agency, then the sale shall be made under the provisions of the Municipal Finance Act of the State of North Carolina, with the approval of the Local Government Commission of said state.
4. Section 6 of said act is as follows:
5. Section 7 of said act is as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Guthrie v. North Carolina State Ports Authority
...is an instrumentality and agency of the State, created and empowered to accomplish a public purpose. G.S. 143-217; Webb v. Port Commission, 205 N.C. 663, 172 S.E. 377 (1934). Harrison Associates v. State Ports Authority, 280 N.C. 251, 258, 185 S.E.2d 793, 797, reh. den. 281 N.C. 317 (1972).......
-
Town of Warrenton v. Warren County
... ... 75, 82 ... S.E. 18; Drainage Com'rs v. C. A. Webb & Co., 160 ... N.C. 594, 76 S.E. 552; Smith v. School ... government, as was originally intended. Webb v. Port ... Commission, 205 N.C. 663, 172 S.E. 377; Wells v ... the opposing reasons. Beardsley v. City of Hartford, ... 50 Conn. 529, 47 Am.Rep. 677 ... ...
-
McGuinn v. City of High Point
... ... Pursuant to Order of the Federal Power Commission on March ... 10, 1939."' ... The ... purpose of this ... to the electorate," I might mention the Morehead City ... Port Commission, Chapter 75, Private Laws of 1933; Webb ... v ... ...
-
Brumley v. Baxter
... ... N.C. 692] This was an action to restrain the City of ... Charlotte from executing deed without monetary ... made for filling vacancies in membership of commission, and ... for reports. In the construction of the ... Brewer, 180 N.C. 403, 104 ... S.E. 887; Webb v. Port Commission, 205 N.C. 663, 172 ... S.E. 377; Wells ... ...