Court Opinion

ID: 9808847
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:52:24.952222+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:19:25.903087
License: Public Domain

Stacy, C. J.,
dissenting: I am content to rest my dissent largely upon quotations from the Court’s opinion.
The following pronouncement, made therein, is not questioned:
“The General Assembly cannot displace it (Superior Court) from its position in the judicial system or establish another court of equal jurisdiction upon a plan different from that provided by the Constitution. Rhyne v. Lipscombe, 122 N. C., 650; Tate v. Commissioners, ibid., 661. But an allotment or division of jurisdiction is within the contemplation of Article IV, sec. 12.”
It is conceded that the General County Court of Buncombe County is not established upon the same plan as that provided in the Constitution for the creation of Superior Courts. But its equality of jurisdiction in civil matters with that of the Superior Court would seem to result from the following provisions of the statute:
C. S., 1608(n) — “The jurisdiction of the general county court in' civil actions shall be as follows:
“1. Jurisdiction concurrent with that of the justices of the peace of the county.
“2. Jurisdiction concurrent with the Superior Court in all actions founded on contract.
“3. Jurisdiction concurrent with the Superior Court in all actions not founded upon contract.”
In the second and third paragraphs, just quoted, it appears that the jurisdiction of the general county court is concurrent with that of the Superior Court in all civil actions founded on contract and in all civil actions not founded upon contract. Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. No point is made of the fact that the general county court is also given civil jurisdiction concurrent with that of the justices of the peace of the county. To this extent its civil jurisdiction is greater than that of the Superior Court. Machine Co. v. Burger, 181 N. C., 241, 107 S. E. 14.
*337Based on tbe foregoing premises, I do not agree witb tbe following conclusions announced in tbe Court’s opinion:
“Tbe statutes authorizing tbe general county courts purport to allot only a part of tbe jurisdiction of tbe Superior Court ahd in tbis respect materially differ from tbe acts creating tbe Circuit Court dealt witb in Rhyne v. Lipscombs
BeogdeN, J., concurs in dissent.