Mitchell v. Sloan, Ex'r. .
HOWELL MITCHELL and Wife Et Al. v. R. M. SLOAN, Ex’r, Et Al.
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
Boyden, J.
This suit was commenced by order of the Judge informa pauperis, and after a decision against the plaintiffs, his Honor, upon motion of the plaintiffs to appeal without security, made an order in the following words, to-wit: “ It appearing to me that the plaintiffs have heretofore, for sufficient cause shown, obtained leave to prosecute this action informa pauperis, it is ordered for the same cause, that the plaintiffs have leave to prosecute said appeal, to the Supreme Court in forma pauperis, without giving any bond or making any deposit for securing costs on said appeal, and without payment of costs to any officer of said Court.” In this there was error. This case is governed by the case of Felton v. Elliott, 66 N. C. R. 196, and the case of Webb v. Taylor and another, same volume, page 412. The statute only allows the Judge of the Superior Court to allow a suit to be prosecuted in his Court informa pauperis, and it would seem to he absurd that a Judge of an inferior Court should be allowed the right to say that the officers of a Superior Court, over whom he has no control, should perform service without compensation.
The suit is dismissed for want of security for the appeal.
The plaintiffs must pay the defendants their costs in this Court. This will be certified.
Per Curiam. - Judgment accordingly.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.