Case Name: ALVIN ROYAL v. F. C. THORNTON et al.
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1909-03-17
Citations: 150 N.C. 293
Docket Number: 
Parties: ALVIN ROYAL v. F. C. THORNTON et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 150
Pages: 293–295

Head Matter:
ALVIN ROYAL v. F. C. THORNTON et al.
(Filed 17 March, 1909.)
1. Injunctions, Before Whom Returnable — Jurisdiction.
Section S14, Revisal, confers upon a judge holding a special term jurisdiction to grant a restraining order, returnable before himself, only in cases “which he may have jurisdiction to hear and determine under the commission issued to him”: I-Ield, that he has no jurisdiction to make a restraining order returnable before himself in a case wherein the summons is returnable to a regular term, beginning after the termination of the special term which he is commissioned to hold. He has no jurisdiction to “hear and determine” such case.
2. Same — Procedure.
A restraining order, improperly made by a judge holding a special term of court, returnable before himself, and by him continued to the hearing, will be reversed, without prejudice to the plaintiff’s rights to apply to a judge having jurisdiction, upon the affidavits filed, or new ones, if so advised. ■ •
AotioN foi; injunction, beard by J. 8. Adams, J., at December (Special) Term, 1908, of Sampson.
Tbe summons in tbis action was issued on 3 December, 1908, returnable to tbe February Term, 1909, of tbe Superior Court of Sampson. On 14 December, 1908, plaintiff filed an affidavit. upon*wbicb be made a motion for a restraining order. His Honor, Judge J. 8. Adams, Judge of tbe Fifteenth Judicial District, bolding a special term of tbe Superior Court of Sampson County in tbe Fifth Judicial District, for tbe trial of civil causes, made a restraining order to defendants to "show cause before him on 21 December, 1908, at Clinton, in said county. Upon tbe return day tbe defendants resisted tbe continuance of tbe order, assigning, among other grounds, “That tbe order is irregular, because made returnable before bis Honor, J. 8. Adams, a judge bolding a special term in Sampson County, in a case in which said judge has no jurisdiction to bear and determine, under tbe commission issued to him. No pleadings being filed, nor tbe summons, being yet returnable, there is no cause for trial, under bis Honor’s commission.” His Honor continued tbe order, with permission to defendants to file bond, etc. Defendants excepted and appealed.
Fowler & Crumpler for plaintiff.
A. McL. Graham and H. A. Grady for defendants.

Opinion:
Connor, J.
Tbe statute (Revisal, sec. 814) provides that the judges of the Superior Court shall have jurisdiction to grant injunctions and issue restraining orders in all civil actions which are authorized by law, provided that a judge bolding a special term in any county may grant an injunction or issue a restraining order, returnable before himself, in any case which be may have jurisdiction to bear and determine, under the commission issued to him, and fbe same shall be returnable as directed by the judge in the order. The only question presented, therefore, is whether Judge Adams bad, by virtue of bis commission to-bold the special term of Sampson County, beginning 14 December, 1908, for the trial of civil causes, jurisdiction "to hear and determine" tbis case. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, defendant was not called upon to answer the complaint until the last day of the February Term, 1909. How, tKen, could Judge Adams "bear and determine" the case? Tbe Legislature baying tbus limited bis jurisdiction to make restraining orders return-. able before bimself in Sampson County, we bave no power to extend the jurisdiction. He bad the right to make the original order, but it should have been returnable before the resident judge of the district or the judge bolding the courts of the district, either by assignment or exchange. Revisal sec. 815; Hamilton v. Icard, 112 N. C., 589. There was error in making the order returnable before bimself. Tbe order continuing the injunction will be reversed, without prejudice to the plaintiff to apply to the judge having jurisdiction for a restraining order, upon the affidavit filed, or a new one, as be may be advised. Of course, by consent, any judge may grant and continue restraining orders. There is Error.