Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
CHILDREN CANNOT BE REMOVED FROM HOME SAYS COURT
After Children Are Once Committed To A Home They Must Remain
BANK CASE TOUCHED
Court Holds That Southport Bank Is Entitled To Recover Amount From Stock Purchasers
Raleigh, N. C., April 2.—Children properly adjudged wards of the state by a juvenile court cannot be taken from the persons or institutions to whom they have been committed by habeas corpus proceedings, it was held by the North Carolina supreme court here today. The case came up on appeal from an order of Judge Henry A. Grady entered in a habeas corpus proceeding instituted by Mrs. Dolly Ruther Fuller to gain control and possession of her two children, John and Ellen Coston, aged 8 and 11. The children previously had been committed to the children's home society of Greensboro by the juvenile court of Duplin county.
The failure of the Commercial National bank of Wilmington was touched upon in a case decided today. Percy Wells and James Howard, purchasers through the bank of Southport of stock in the defunct bank appealed from a judgment requiring them to pay to the Southport institution a note of $5,000 given for the stock. The court held that though the principals in the stock sale, Thomas E. Cooper and W. B. Cooper, knew that the bank for which T. E. sold W. B.'s stock was insolvent at the time of the sale, that Thomas E. acted against the best interests of the Southport bank and that it was an innocent party to the transaction and was entitled to recover the amount of the note from the purchasers of the stock.
Following is the list of cases decided by today's opinions:
Hansucker vs. Corbit, Pitt, no error.
In re Coston, Sampson, reversed.
State vs Melton, Hoke, new trial.
Kidder vs Bailey, New Hanover, error.
Peoples United Bank, receiver, vs Wells, Brunswick, no error.
McInnish vs Board Education, Hoke county, Hoke, affirmed.
Blair vs Commissioners, New Hanover, error.
Bank of Maxton vs Canady, Robeson, affirmed.
State vs Williams, Durham, no error.
State vs Hayes, Durham, no error.
Pyles vs Pyles, Orange, error.
Teague vs Current, Person, modified and affirmed.
In re will of Willett, Lee, per curiam judgment affirmed without written opinion.