{
  "id": 8688820,
  "name": "CHRISTIAN MORETZ v. G. W. RAY and others",
  "name_abbreviation": "Moretz v. Ray",
  "decision_date": "1876-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "170",
  "last_page": "172",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "75 N.C. 170"
    }
  ],
  "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": 222,
    "char_count": 3494,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.494,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6420617506102915e-07,
      "percentile": 0.691278140154117
    },
    "sha256": "91353eeda14db8839089ee4e40bc5847e9ce12098655b8c2fa996cd14a5417aa",
    "simhash": "1:f9ebf93ef3c63cfd",
    "word_count": 615
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:17:21.962704+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "CHRISTIAN MORETZ v. G. W. RAY and others."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Bynum, J.\nThis case comes up to this Court upon a demurrer to the complaint. Neither the bond of the Register of Deeds is set out in the complaint or the conditions thereof, so that the Court can see that any breach has been committed or even that the bond required by law has been executed by the defendants.\nWaiving all this, however, and assuming that the usual Register\u2019s bond has been filed by the defendants, we have decided at this term of the Court, in the case of Holt v. McLean, et al., the facts of which are almost identical with this, that an action on the bond cannot be maintained. The remedy of the plaintiff is either by indictment or an action for damages against the Register of Deeds individually.\nThere is no error.\nPer CrTHiAM. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Bynum, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Smith & Strong, for the appellant.",
      "Folk & Armfield, contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "CHRISTIAN MORETZ v. G. W. RAY and others.\nAn action cannot be maintained on the official bond of the Register of Deeds, for issuing a license to marry a girl under eighteen years of age, without the written consent of her father or mother. The remedy of the plaintiff is either by indictment, or an action for damages against the Register of Deeds individually.\n{Holt v. McLeam, et at decided at this term, cited and approved.)\nThis was a Civil ActioN, to recover a penalty upon the \u2022official bond of the Register of Deeds, tried before -his Honor, Judge Furches, at the Fall Term, 1875, of Ashe Superior Court.\nThe plaintiff alleged in his complaint, that the defendant Ray is the Register of Deeds in and for the County of Ashe, and that the other defendants are the sureties on his official bond, in the penal sum of five thousand dollars.\nThat the defendant, E. C. Bartlett, is acting deputy Register for said Ray in his said office.\nThat said defendant Ray, by his said deputy Bartlett, on tbe 11th day of March, 1873, did issue a license, by virtue of his said office, to any minister of the gospel or to any Justice of the Peace of said county, to solemnize the rites of. matrimony between one George Clawson and Alice Moretz, both of Watauga County; that the said Alice is the daughter of the plaintiff, and was at the time of issuing said license under the age of eighteen, and living with the plaintiff ; and that said license was issued without the written consent of the plaintiff or his wife, and against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and to the great damage of the plaintiff.\nThat by reason of the unlawful issuing of said license the defendants are liable on the official bond of the defendant Ray, Register as aforesaid, in the sum of two hundred dollars.\nWherefore the plaintiff demands judgment for five thousand dollars, to be discharged upon the payment of two hundred dollars, &c.\nThe defendants demurred because:\nThat there was a misjoinder of parties ;\nThat the complaint does not show that the sureties, E. C. Bartlett, L. C. Gentry and John Dickson, ever gave any bond or other obligation as sureties;\nThat the demand does not exceed two hundred dollars, and is, therefore, under the jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace;\nThat the complaint alleges that the license was issued to-George Clawson to marry his own daughter without alleging that the defendant knew the fact.\nThat the complaint does not allege that the defendants knew of the said Alice\u2019s being under the age of eighteen.\nHis Honor sustained the demurrer and gave judgment against the plaintiff for costs.\nFrom this judgment the plaintiff appealed.\nSmith & Strong, for the appellant.\nFolk & Armfield, contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0170-01",
  "first_page_order": 178,
  "last_page_order": 180
}