{
  "id": 11277990,
  "name": "STATE ex. rel. D. H. McNEILL et. al. v. JOHN MORRISON, et. al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "State ex rel. McNeill v. Morrison",
  "decision_date": "1869-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "508",
  "last_page": "510",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "63 N.C. 508"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 232,
    "char_count": 3377,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.439,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.305467653810098e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7878671690897809
    },
    "sha256": "afa1e1de03958630cb1407440130124ddb68158514da1c44c2ee7d4dc2810848",
    "simhash": "1:8755823609f84d49",
    "word_count": 605
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:48.011339+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE ex. rel. D. H. McNEILL et. al. v. JOHN MORRISON, et. al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Reade, J.\nThe statute authorizes the Court to appoint the \u25a0Clerk, or some other fit person, to make sales, &c.\nWhenever the pef son who is Clerk is appointed, it is to be taken that he is appointed in his official capacity. Especially is this so, when in the order appointing him, he is designated \u2022as \u201cClerk.\u201d\nThe words \u201csome other fit person\u201d mean some other person than he who is acting as Clerk. It may be that if the order of appointment negatived the idea that he was appointed in his official capacity, he might fall under the words, \u201cother fit person,\u201d but that is not this case.\nIt is to be taken that the bond was payable to A. C. Currie, Clerk, &c., and reported to Court and filed in his office, and that upon it he received the money.\nThe Clerk, then, and Ms sureties are liable upon his official bond, Broughton v. Haywood, Phil. 380.\nThere is no error. Judgment will be entered here for the-plaintiff.\nPer Curiam. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Reade, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Manning, and AT. McKay contra,"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE ex. rel. D. H. McNEILL et. al. v. JOHN MORRISON, et. al.\nWhenever the Clerk of a Court is appointed to make sales, &c., it is to be taken that he is appointed in his official capacity, unless the order of appointment expressly negatives the idea; and for default under such appointment the Clerk and his sureties are liable upon his oficial bond.\niBroughkm. v. Haywood, Phil. 380, cited and approved.)\n. Debt, tried before Warren, J., at Pall Term 1867 of the Superior Court of Moore,\nThe action was brought on the bond of one Currie, (deceased) \u2022Clerk of the County Court of Moore. The bond was given at October Term 1854 of the County Court, and the defendants are the sureties thereto. At July Term 1854of the County Court, \u25a0a, petition had been filed by the plaintiffs in this suit, praying for the sale of a slave for division, said slave belonging to the plaintiffs as tenants in common. At October Term 1854, there was this entry upon the trial docket: \u201cPrayer of petition granted. Ordered by the Court that A.. C. Currie be appointed commissioner to sell the slave,' and report to the next term of the Court. Por decree, see minutes.\u201d The parts of the decree necessary to be stated are as follows: \u201cIt is therefore ordered, \u00bfadjudged and decreed that Alexander C. Currie be appointed a commissioner to make sale of said slave on a credit of six-months, &c.\u201d \u201cIt is further ordered that the said commissioner make his return to the next term of this Court.\u201d At January Term 1855 a report was made, signed \u201cA. C. Currie, Commis-missioner,\u201d and confirmed. It set forth that the slave was \u25a0sold on the 29th day of December, 1854, to Cornelius Dunlap, on a credit of six months, and that Dunlap gave his bond for $1,026, the purchase money. It was in evidence that Currie received the money on this bond before it became due, less some ten of fifteen per cent, upon the amount, and surrendered the bond to Dunlap, and shortly thereafter died. There was also \u25a0evidence of a demand before the commencement of this suit.\nIt was insisted that upon this evidence the sureties on the bond of Currie were not liable, but the Court was of \u00e1 different \u2022opinion, and there was a verdict for the plaintiff.\nRule for a New Trial; Rule discharged; Judgment, and Appeal.\nPerson for the appellants, cited Sanders v. Bean, Bus. 318.\nManning, and AT. McKay contra,\ncited State v. Bradshaw^ 1-0 Ire. 229, Broughton v. Haywood, Phil, 380."
  },
  "file_name": "0508-01",
  "first_page_order": 524,
  "last_page_order": 526
}