Case Name: J. S. HINSON, H. L. EVANS, CARL ROSE, JOHN COLBERT, R. S. WALTERS and J. A. LYONS v. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF YADKIN COUNTY, D. A. REYNOLDS, J. W. SHORE and L. L. SMITHERMAN, Commissioners
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1940-01-03
Citations: 216 N.C. 806
Docket Number: 
Parties: J. S. HINSON, H. L. EVANS, CARL ROSE, JOHN COLBERT, R. S. WALTERS and J. A. LYONS v. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF YADKIN COUNTY, D. A. REYNOLDS, J. W. SHORE and L. L. SMITHERMAN, Commissioners.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 216
Pages: 806–806

Head Matter:
J. S. HINSON, H. L. EVANS, CARL ROSE, JOHN COLBERT, R. S. WALTERS and J. A. LYONS v. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF YADKIN COUNTY, D. A. REYNOLDS, J. W. SHORE and L. L. SMITHERMAN, Commissioners.
(Filed 3 January, 1940.)
Appeal and Error § 38—
When the Supreme Court is evenly divided in opinion, one Justice not sitting, the judgment of the lower court will be affirmed without becoming a precedent.
Appeal by defendants from Ervin, Special Judge, at Newland, N. C., 6 July, 1939. Hearing on a restraining order, by consent, from Yadkin.
Affirmed.
Barker & Hampton and Folger & Folger for plaintiffs.
Wm. M. Allen, Hoke F. Henderson, and David L. Kelley for defendants.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
There is but a single question raised on this appeal: Is chapter 525, Public-Local Laws of North Carolina, 1939, applicable to Yadkin County and permitting, with a vote of the people, special school taxes to be levied as therein provided, a violation of section 29, Article II, N. C. Constitution, which declares that "The General Assembly shall not pass any local, private, or special act or resolution . . . establishing or changing the lines of school districts, . . ." and, therefore, unconstitutional ?
The Court being evenly divided in opinion, Stacy, C. J., not sitting, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed and stands as the decision of this action without becoming a precedent. Ins. Co. v. Stinson, 214 N. C., 97.
The judgment of the court below is
Affirmed.