Court Opinion

ID: 9812852
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:50:50.065191+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:27:03.130024
License: Public Domain

Clare, J.,
(concurring.) This action was brought to- the term of Court. The Clerk had jurisdiction to issue the warrant of attachment, the ancillary remedy 'in the cause. Upon answer filed, he transferred the issue thereby raised on August 29th to the Court at term. He was, therefore, functus officio, and acting without authority, when, in Octo-*432her, lie entertained and granted a motion to vacate the attachment, which was no longer before him. Forbes v. McGuire, 116 N. C., 449. But on appeal to the Judge the latter had jurisdiction (Acts 1887, chap. 276; Roseman v. Roseman [at this term]' — ), and the actio'll of the Judge was erroneous, for the reasons given in the opinion of the Court.