Proceedings to repeal letters of administration ought to be commenced in the Court in which they were granted. This certiorari must therefore be dismissed.
Ledbetter v. Lofton, 5 N.C. 224, 1 Mur. 224 (1809)
July 1809
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
5 N.C. 224, 1 Mur. 224
Ledbetter v. Lofton, administrator of Dunn.
From Rowan.
Proceedings to repeal letters of administration, must be commenced in tire Court in which, the letters were granted. The Superior Courts can exercise only appellate jurisdiction in such cases.
Letters of administration on the estate of Allen Dunn, deceased, were granted to Lofton by the County Court of Montgomery and shortly afterwards, he instituted an action of detinue in Salisbury Superior Court, against» Ledbetter, for certain negro slaves which were of the estate of the said Allen Dunn. Pending the suit, Ledbet-ter filed an affidavit, stating certain facts upon which he prayed that the letters of administration granted to Lof-ton, might be repealed, and that for this purpose a writ of certiorari might be awarded, to have the record of granting administration to Lofton certified to Salisbury Superior Court. A writ of certiorari was awarded, and the record certified. Sundry affidavits were taken, and the case coming on to be heard, it was moved by Defendant’s counsel, that the certiorari be dismissed, on the ground that proceedings to repeal letters of administration ought to be commenced in the County Court which granted them : that the Superior Court could only exercise an appellate jurisdiction in such cases, or in consequence of its extraordinary and superintending power over inferior Courts, award a writ of certiorari to revise, their judgments, where they had refused a right to which a party was entitled, or some error or wrong had been committed, and the party affected thereby shewed some good reason why he did not bring up the case by appeal. That in the present case, Ledbetter had not applied to the County Court to repeal the letters of administration, nor in his affidavit stated' any facts to call forth the exercise of the extraordinary powers of the Superior Court in awarding a certiorari. The motion to dismiss the *225certiorari was sent to this Court for the opinion of the Judges. i