Pegram v. Commissioners of Cleaveland County
M. P. Pegram v. Commissioners of Cleveland County.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Dick, J.
This case was before the Court at last Term, ( 61 N. C. 557 ,) and “ it was declared to be the opinion of this Court, that the writ of mandamms should be issued as prayed for.”
His Honor in the Court below, declined to order the writ to be issued, because the individuals who comprised the Board of Commissioners, had been changed, and they “ had not had a day in Court.”
The County of Cleaveland is a municipal corporation, and “its power can only be exercised by the Board of Commissioners,” &c. “All acts or proceedings by or against a Oounty in its corporate capacity, shall be in the name of the Board of Commissioners. (Acts 1868, ch. 20.) As all the corporate functions of a county are thus to be exercised, the Board of Commissioners must necessarily have a perpetual existence, continued by members who succeed each other, and the body remains the same notwithstanding a change in the individuals who compose it.
The County is a public corporation, and has certain public duties to perform, and according to the provision of the statute above referred to, the writ of mandamus must be directed to the Board of Commissioners, who exercise the corporate powers, (Tapping on Man. 317,) and the individuals *116 who compose the Board at the time of service, must obey the writ.
There was error. Let this be certified.
Pee, Oueiam. Judgment reversed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 12 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.