rh Carolina btafe Library
Raleigh
N.
ft
C.
THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ANNUAL REPORT
OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
1966
mutt
North Carolina S*aJe Library
KaJaigh
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
JUSTICE BUILDING
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
J. FRANK HUSKINS
DIRECTOR
BERT M. MONTAGUE
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
To The Honorable, The Chief Justice Of The Supreme
Court Of North Carolina.
Submitted herewith is the First -Annual Report of
the Administrative Officer of the Courts. This Report,
prepared pursuant to G. S. 7.A-343, relates to the
1966 calendar year.
J. Frank Huskins
Director
/
I
Page
Structure of The Judicial Department 1
The Courts in Transition - The Administrative Office ..... 2
The Supreme Court 11
The Courts Commission 12
Judicial Council 13
Conference of Superior Court Judges ............. 13
Superior Court Judges and Judicial Districts 14
Solicitors and Solicitorial Districts . 15
District Court Judges and Prosecutors 16
Clerks of Superior Court 17
The Superior Court . 18
Civil Dockets 19
Criminal Dockets 22
Inferior Courts, Criminal Disposition ............. 26
TABLES
I. The Superior Court -
A - Civil Cases Pending, Added and Disposed of ..... . 27
B - Utilization of Civil Court Terms 32
C - Ages of Pending Civil Cases 37
D - Criminal Cases Pending, Added and Disposed of ... . 42
E - Utilization of Criminal Court Terms 46
II. The District Court -
F - Cases Pending in the District Court. . 51
THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ANNUAL REPORT
of the
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
1966
STRUCTURE OF THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
I. Prior to the effective date of The Judicial Department Act of 1965:
THE SUPREME COURT
THE SUPERIOR COURT
GENERAL COUNTY COURT
DOMESTIC RELATIONS
COURT
COUNTY RECORDER'S COUR
MUNICIPAL RECORDER'S
COURT
MAYOR'S
COURT
COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT
TOWNSHIP RECORDER'S
COURT
JUVENILE
COURT
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
COURT
II. Under The Judicial Department Act of 1965:
GENERAL
COURT
OF
JUSTICE
APPELLATE DIVISION
THE SUPREME COURT ..
ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICE OF THE
COURTS
SUPERIOR COURT
DIVISION 1
_J JJlblrtlU
DIVISION
This structure is now in effect as to twenty-two counties. The District Court will be activated in
sixty-one additional counties on December 2, 1968. On December 7, 1970, the new system will become implemented
on a state-wide basis.
- 1 -
THE COURTS IN TRANSITION
Historically, v.e have had in North Carolina three levels of courts --
the Supreme Court, the Superior Court, and, at the local level, hundreds of
recorder's courts, domestic relations courts, mayor's courts, county courts,
and justice of the peace courts. All of these lower courts were creatures of
the Legislature, hardly any two alike. They exercised such jurisdiction as
was given them by statute. It was recognized more than twelve years ago that
something should be done to bring uniformity to our court system; and, at the
suggestion of Governor Hodges and Chief Justice Barnhill, the North Carolina
Bar Association sponsored a study in depth which ultimately resulted in the
submission of a Constitutional Amendment to the people of the State, which was
voted upon and adopted by the people at the general election held November 6,
1962. Thus, Article IV of the Constitution of North Carolina now provides:
"The judicial power of the State shall be vested in a . . . General Court of
Justice. The General Court of Justice shall constitute a unified judicial system
for purposes of jurisdiction, operation and administration; and shall consist of
an appellate division, a superior court division, and a district court division. "
There was insufficient time between the passage of the Constitutional
Amendment and the convening of the 1963 General Assembly to permit the
preparation of legislation to implement the new judicial article. The General
Assembly of 1963 provided for the appointment of a Courts Commission and
charged it with the responsibility "to prepare and draft the legislation necessary
for the full and complete implementation of Article IV of the Constitution of
North Carolina".
- P -
The Courts Commission began its study soon after the adjournment
of the 1963 General Assembly. Its work between sessions culminated in the
passage of The Judicial Department Act of 196 5, codified as Chapter 7A of
the General Statutes. This Act implemented the constitutional structure of the
courts, created an Administrative Office of the Courts, established the frame-work
of the District Court Division within the General Court of Justice, and
provided for activation of the District Court in three separate phases.
The Appellate Division is the present Supreme Court of North
Carolina. We anticipate that it will be enlarged by the 1967 General Assembly
to include an intermediate Court of Appeals, so as to relieve the burden
occasioned by the volume of work at the appellate level.
The Superior Court Division consists of the Superior Courts of North
Carolina. This division will remain essentially unchanged, allowing, of course
for the addition of manpower as the State continues to grow and litigation con-tinues
to increase.
The District Court Division introduces the greatest change in our
system. The 1965 Act provided for the establishment of a District Court on
December 5, 1966, in six judicial districts, comprising twenty-two counties.
In December, 1968, the District Court will be established in an additional
sixty-one counties, and in December, 1970, in the remaining seventeen counties.
The District Court will have exclusive original jurisdiction of misde-meanors,
and concurrent jurisdiction of civil cases where the amount in contro-versy
is $5,000 or less, and of domestic relations cases regardless of the
amount in controversy. Jury trial is provided, upon demand, in civil cases.
- 3 -
Appeal therefrom to the Superior Court is on questions of law, only. No jury
is authorized in criminal cases. Upon appeal, trial de novo will be had in
Superior Court. District judges will be elected to four-year terms.
When the District Court is established in a judicial district, all
courts inferior to the Superior Court are abolished, all cases pending in the
abolished courts are transferred to the dockets of the District Court for trial,
and all records of the abolished courts must be transferred to the office of the
Clerk of Superior Court, who, under the law, is required to maintain a system
of consolidated records for both the Superior Court and the District Court.
The Chief District Judge in each district has many administrative
responsibilities, including the following: arranging schedules and assigning
district judges for sessions of district courts; arranging or supervising the
calendaring of matters for trial or hearing; supervising the clerk of court in
the discharge of the clerical functions of the District Court; assigning matters
to magistrates, and prescribing times and places at which magistrates shall
be available for the performance of their duties; making arrangements with
proper authorities for the drawing of civil court jury panels and determining
which sessions of the District Court shall be jury sessions; arranging for the
reporting of civil cases by court reporters or other authorized means; arranging
sessions, to the extent practicable, for the trial of specialized cases, including
traffic, domestic relations, and other types of cases, and assigning district
judges to preside over these sessions so as to permit maximum practicable
specialization by individual judges; promulgating a schedule of traffic offenses
for which magistrates and clerks of court may accept written appearances,
- 4 -
waivers of trial, and pleas of guilty, and establishing a schedule of fines
therefor; assigning magistrates, in an emergency, to temporary duty outside
the county of their residence, but within the district; and designating another
district judge of his district as acting Chief District Judge. The foregoing
itemization clearly demonstrates that the Chief District Judge will be a very
busy person. He will be expected to hold his reasonable share of courts while
attending to all the administrative duties.
As noted above, the office of justice of the peace will be abolished.
The old days of the "fee system" are gone forever. While it is obviously true
that over the years we have had many fine justices of the peace, it is neverthe-less
well known that the system was abused by many who did not have sufficient
regard for the fact that they were judicial officers of this State. The people have
decreed that magistrates shall hereafter act in minor civil and criminal matters
only. The law prescribes the number of magistrates for each county, requires
that they be paid a salary by the State, and gives the Chief District Judge general
supervisory authority over them. They are appointed by the Senior Resident
Superior Court Judge of each judicial district, upon recommendation by the Clerk
of Superior Court. They serve for a term of two years, and their salary is set
by the Administrative Office of the Courts, within the salary range authorized by
statute.
The people of this State, when they amended the Constitution in 1962,
directed the General Assembly to provide for an Administrative Office of the
Courts to carry out the provisions of the Constitutional Amendment. That was
done by the General Assembly of 196 5. The primary duties of the Director of
- 5 -
that office, as set forth in G. S. 7.A-343, are as follows: collect and compile
statistical data and other information on the judicial and financial operation of
the courts and on the operation of other offices directly related to and serving
the courts; determine the state of the dockets and evaluate the practices and
procedures of the courts, and make recommendations concerning the number
of judges, solicitors, prosecutors and magistrates required for the efficient
administration of justice; prescribe uniform administrative and business methods,
systems, forms and records to be used in the offices of the clerks of court;
prepare and submit budget estimates of State appropriations necessary for the
maintenance and operation of The Judicial Department, and authorize expenditures
from funds appropriated for these purposes; investigate, make recommendations
concerning, and assist in the securing of adequate physical accommodations for
the General Court of Justice; procure, distribute, exchange, transfer, and assign
such equipment, books, forms and supplies as are to be acquired with State funds
for the General Court of Justice; make recommendations for the improvement of
the operations of The Judicial Department; prepare and submit an annual report
on the work of The Judicial Department to the Chief Justice, and transmit a copy
to each member of the General Assembly; assist the Chief Justice in performing
his duties relating to the transfer of district court judges for temporary or
specialized duty; and perform such additional duties and exercise such additional
powers as may be prescribed by statute or assigned by the Chief Justice.
Numerous additional special functions are found in applicable sections
of The Judicial Department Act of 196 5, as follows: assist the Chief Justice in
scheduling courts and assigning judges; approve designation of attorney to assist
- 6 -
solicitor of Superior Court and authorize length of time of service; provide
mechanical recording devices for Superior Court trials, if reporter unavailable,
and determine salary limits of court reporters; determine the numbers and
salaries of assistant clerks, deputy clerks, and other employees of clerks'
office; with Department of .Administration and subject to approval of State
.Auditor, establish procedures for receipt, deposit, protection, investment,
and disbursement of funds; fix amount of clerks' bond and determine adequacy;
prescribe and procure bonds for assistant and deputy clerks and other employees;
concur with Chief District Judge in determining adequacy of facilities for additional
seats of district court; in conjunction with Chief District Judge, determine
whether special counselor services should be made available to the District
Court in counties of 100,000 population or more and determine number and
salaries; determine additional compensation and allowances paid to holdover
district court judges; designate specialized judgeships; approve designation of
attorneys to assist prosecutor of the District Court and authorize length of
service; prescribe salaries to be paid to magistrates and approve establishment
of additional magistrateships within maximum authorized by the General Assembly
and set salaries; determine amount of magistrates' bonds and procure such bonds;
prescribe records to be maintained by magistrates; supervise establishment and
maintenance of office of consolidated records in each clerk of court's office and
prescribe form and style of records; provide mechanical recorders for district
courts and determine salary range for district court reporters; establish alterna-tive
procedures for prompt payment of jurors, witnesses, and "other small
expense items"; approve provision of physical facilities by a municipality; approve
- 7 -
amount of surplus from "facilities fees" to be used for retirement of outstanding
indebtedness or to supplement operation of the General Court of Justice.
Under our former system, the expenses of operating the courts of
this State have been paid from 101 different sources. Under the new system,
essentially all the expenses of the courts will be paid by the State. The 100
counties, numerous municipalities, and the State have been spending an estimated
$20, 000, 000 per year to operate the courts. Under the new system, this figure
should remain essentially the same, except as additional costs may be occasioned
by an expanding economy and a corresponding increase in litigation.
After the establishment of the Administrative Office on July 1, 1965,
the Director proceeded to organize the office and began plans for activation of
the District Court in twenty -two counties on December 5, 1966. Three divisions
were established in the Administrative Office -- accounting and budget, personnel,
and clerks' supervisor. Division heads were employed, and the recruiting of a
sufficient staff to serve during the first phase of the District Court implementa-tion
began. The budget request for the 196 7-69 biennium was prepared and
presented. The operating budget for the remainder of the 196 5-6 7 biennium was
worked out from the initial lump sum appropriation. Following the election of
che District Court judges, the Chief Justice designated the Chief District Judges.
The Superior Court Judges selected and appointed District Court prosecutors,
magistrates, and court reporters. A special committee of the Association of
Clerks of Superior Court was appointed to assist the office in the preparation of
uniform forms and practices for the clerks' offices. This project has progressed
satisfactorily, but will require several years for completion. Uniform accounting
- 8 -
and auditing practices for The Judicial Department were established. Inventories
and determinations of needs for forms, equipment and supplies in the various
clerks' offices were made. A study was conducted as to the adequacy of court
facilities at the additional seats of court within the various counties. Construc-tion
and renovation was suggested in some localities, and this work was instituted.
Seminars were planned and held for the purpose of training the new judicial and
other court personnel. A program of instruction designed to train an adequate
supply of court reporters was instituted in the community college system. A
study of mechanical recording equipment was made in order that this equipment
might be made available in the event a sufficient number of court reporters were
not available. .A classification and pay plan for Judicial Department employees
was prepared. Position authorizations were made for assistant and deputy clerks
and other employees of the clerks' offices. The numbers and salaries of
magistrates were prescribed. Bond requirements were studied, and bonds
were procured for the necessary officers and employees. Numerous administra-tive
and legal memoranda were prepared and distributed for guidance of the
personnel affected. Statistical reporting forms were devised, printed and
distributed. Finally, in these plans and organizational problems, constant
coordination was maintained with the Chief Justice, the Courts Commission,
the State Department of Administration, and local officials.
The Administrative Officer has attended and participated in the meetings
of the Courts Commission. His recommendations for improvements in the law
and in the operations of The Judicial Department are embodied in the recommenda-tions
which will be made by the Courts Commission to the 1967 General Assembly.
- 9 -
By 1970 North Carolina should have a unified system of courts -- The
General Court of Justice -- housed in appropriate facilities at all levels and
conducted in a proper atmosphere so as to afford, in truth as well as in theory,
equal justice under law for every man. The resulting improvement in the
administration of justice is obvious and should be a source of pride to all those
who have participated in the effort. We need the help, the cooperation, and the
understanding of the judicial officers and employees and, indeed, of all citizens
of the State in this endeavor.
M /////////// /
Since the District Court has been in session only six weeks as of the
time of preparation of this Report, there has been insufficient time for the
preparation of meaningful data on the new system. In view of the activation dates
of the District Court -- i. e. , December of the respective years -- reports will
henceforth be based on the calendar year. Table "F" shows the number of cases
accumulated on the District Court dockets, by transfer and by new filings,
between December 5 and December 31, 1966. The remaining data and analysis
constitutes a continuation of the fiscal-year-based reports formerly made by the
Administrative Assistant.
- 10 -
JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT
OF NORTH CAROLINA
Chief Justice:
R. HUNT PARKER.
Associate Justices:
William H. Bobbitt, I. Beverly Lake,
Carlisle W. Higgins, J. Will Pless, Jr. ,
Susie Sharp, Joseph Branch.
Emergency Justices:
William B. Rodman, Jr. ,
Emery B. Denny.
The Supreme Court considered 685 cases during the 196 5-66 court
year. Opinions were written in 46 5 cases. There were 220 petitions and
motions presented and disposed of.
SUPREME COURT
Cases Decided by Written Opinions
1956 - 1966
Full Opinions
264
Per Curiam Total
1956 - 57 94 3 58
1957 - 58 2 53 74 327
19 58 - 59 257 58 315
1959 - 60 277 81 3 58
1960 - 61 2 70 77 347
1961 - 62 262 81 343
1962 - 63 287 92 3 79
1963 - 64 277 142 419
1964 - 65 304 169 473
1965 - 66 287 178 46 5
Of the opinions written during the year, 307 were in civil cases, and
158 were in criminal cases. Criminal appeals increased 151% over the
1963-64 court year. Corrective action was taken in 181 cases.
- 11 -
NORTH CAROLINA COURTS COMMISSION
19 6 7
Senator Lindsay C. Warren, Jr. - Chairman
Goldsboro, North Carolina
Senator Ruffin Bailey-
Raleigh, North Carolina
Representative David M. Britt
Fairmont, North Carolina
Senator J. J. Harrington
Lewiston, North Carolina
Representative Sneed High
Fayetteville, North Carolina
Mr. Herbert Hyde
Asheville, North Carolina
Mr. Wilbur M. Jolly
Louisburg, North Carolina
Mr. KarlW. McGhee
Wilmington, North Carolina
Mr. James B. McMillan
Charlotte, North Carolina
Dean J. D. Phillips
Law School, University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Mr. J. Eugene Snyder
Lexington, North Carolina
Mr. H. P. Taylor, Jr.
Wadesboro, North Carolina
Mr. Lacy Thornburg
Sylva, North Carolina
Representative Earl W. Vaughn
Draper, North Carolina
Mr. A. A. Zollicoffer, Jr.
Henderson, North Carolina
- 12 -
JUDICIAL COUNCIL
William H. Bobbitt, Senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,
Chairman
James C. Farthing, Resident Judge of the 25th Judicial District,
Lenoir
Henry A. McKinnon, Jr., Resident Judge of the 16th Judicial District
Lumberton
Sam J. Ervin, III, Representative, Burke County
John C. Kesler, Attorney, Salisbury
W. Marion Allen, President, N. C. State Bar, Elkin
L. B. Hollowell, Attorney, G-astonia
James F. Bullock, Assistant Attorney General
M. G. Boyette, Solicitor, 13th Solicitorial District, Carthage
Bryan Grimes, Past President, N. C. State Bar, Washington
Bonner D. Sawyer, Past President, N. C. State Bar, Hillsboro
Dan K. Edwards, Solicitor, 10th Solicitorial District, Durham
James Newsom, Attorney, Durham
Frank H. Watson, Attorney, Spruce Pine
CONFERENCE OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES
President, Judge Raymond B. Mallard, Tabor City
President Elect, Judge Walter E. Crissman, High Point
Vice President, Hamilton H. Hobgood, Louisburg
Secretary, Judge Eugene Shaw, Greensboro
Additional Executive Committee Members:
Judge Hugh B. Campbell, Charlotte'
Judge Rudolph I. Mintz, Wilmington
13
NORTH CAROLINA JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
'23
28
2?
25» /22
*r -rti r
."""
r/jti IS _^xSwvJi\ */*s-<
r~i9_\ •9
*|B
K6^-/-
20 12
-flj
16
3_
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES
BY DISTRICTS
1. Walter W. Cohoon Elizabeth City
2. Elbert S. Peel, Jr. Williamston
3. William J. Bundy Greenville
4. Hovard H. Hubbard Clinton
5. Rudolph I. Mint7 Wilmington
6. Joseph W. Parker Windsor
7. George M. Fountain Tarboro
8. Albert W. Covper Kinston
9. Hamilton H. Hobgood Louisburg
10. William Y. Bickett Raleigh
10. James H. Pou Bailey Raleigh
11. Harry E. Canaday Smithfield
12. E. Maurice Braswell Fayetteville
13. Raymond B. Mallard Tabor City
u. Clarence W. Hall Durham
15. Leo Carr Burlington
16. Henry A. McKinnon, Jr. Lumberton
17. Allen H. Gvyn Reidsville
18. Eugene G. Shav: Greensboro
18. Walter E. Crissman High Point
19. Frank M. Armstrong Troy
20. John D. McConnell Southern Pines
21. Walter E. Johnston, Jr. Winston-Salem
21. Harvey A. Lupton Winston-Salem
22. John R. McLaughlin Statesville
23. Robert M. Gambill North Wilkesboro
24. W. E. Anglin Burn svi lie
25. James C. Farthing Lenoir
26. Hugh B. Campbell Charlotte
26. Francis 0. Clarkson Charlotte
27. P. C. Froneberger Gastonia
27. B. T. Falls, Jr. Shelby
28. W. K. McLean
29. J. W. Jackson
30. T. D. Bryson
SPECIAL JUDGES
Walter E. Brock
Edward B. Clark
J. William Copeland
James F. Latham
Harry C. Martin
Hubert E. May
H. L. Riddle, Jr.
Fred H. Hasty
Asheville
Hendersonville
Bryson City
Wadesboro
Elizabethtown
Murfreesboro
Burlington
Asheville
Nashville
Morganton
Charlotte
EMERGENCY JUDGES
Walter J. Bone
W. H. S. Burgwyn
Zeb V. Nettles
Q. K. Nimocks, Jr.
Hubert E. Olive
George B. Patton
F. Donald Phillips
H. Hoyle Sink
Henry L. Stevens
Chester R. Morris
Nashville
Woodland
Asheville
Fayetteville
Lexington
Franklin
Rockingham
Greensboro
Warsaw
Coinjock
14
NORTH CAROLINA SOLICITORIAL DISTRICTS
SOLICITORS OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
BY SOLICITORIAL DISTRICTS
1. Herbert Small Elizabeth City
2. Roy R. Holdford, Jr. Wilson
3. W. H. S. Burgwyn, Jr. Woodland
4. Archie Taylor Llllington
5. Luther Hamilton, Jr. Morehead City
6. Walter T. Britt Clinton
7. William G. Ransdell, Jr. Raleigh
8. James C. Bowman Southport
9. Doran J. Berry Fayetteville
9A. John B. Regan St. Pauls
10. Dan K. Edwards Durham
10A. Thomas D. Cooper, Jr. Burlington
11. Thomas W. Moore, Jr. Winston-Saleu
12. Charles T. Kivett Greensboro
13. M. G. Boyette Carthage
14.. Henry M. Whitesides Gastonia
L4A. Elliott M. Schwartz Charlotte
15. Zeb A. Morris Concord
16. W. Hampton Childs, Jr. Lincolnton
17. J. Allie Hayes N. Wilkesboro
18. Leonard Lowe Caroleen
19. Clyde M. Roberts Marshall
20. Marcellus Buchanan, III Sylva
21. Charles M. Neaves Elkin
15 -
NORTH CAROLINA JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
JUDGES
DISTRICT COURT JUDGES AND
PROSECUTORS BY DISTRICTS
»1.
1.
Fentress Horner
William S. Privott
Elizabeth City
Edenton
*12.
12.
12.
12.
Coy E. Brewer
Derb S. Carter
Joseph E. Dupree
Darius B. Herring, Jr.
Fayetteville
Fayetteville
Raeford
Fayetteville
u.
u.
Thomas H. Lee
E. Lawson Moore
Samuel 0. Riley
Durham
Durham
Durham
16.
»16.
16.
Samuel E. Britt
Robert F. Floyd
John S. Gardner
Lumberton
Fairmont
Lumberton
25.
25.
•25.
Joe H. Evans
Keith S. Snyder
Mary G. Whitener
Hickory
Lenoir
Hickory
*30. F. E. Alley, Jr.
30. Robert J. Leatherwood, III
PROSECUTORS
1. W.F. Walker, Jr.
12. George Z. Stuhl
U. J. M. Read, Jr.
16. Charles G. McLean
25. J. C Rudisill, Jr.
30. J. Charles McDarris
Wayne svi lie
Bryson City
Currituck
Fayetteville
Durham
Lumberton
Newton
Waynes\rille
•Chief District Court Judges
16
North Carolina Stale Library
ftaieigh
CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT
COUNTY
Alamance
Alexander
Alleghany-
Anson
Ashe
Avery
Beaufort
Bertie
Bladen
Brunswick
Buncombe
Burke
Cabarrus
Caldwell
Camden
Carteret
Caswell
Catawba
Chatham
Cherokee
Chowan
Clay
Cleveland
Columbus
Craven
Cumberland
Currituck
Dare
Davidson
Davie
Duplin
Durham
Edgecombe
Forsyth
Franklin
Gaston
Gates
Graham
Granville
Greene
Guilford
Halifax
Harnett
Haywood
Henderson
Hertford
Hoke
Hyde
Iredell
Jackson
CLERK OF COURT
D. M. McLelland
Atwell B. Bumgarner
Glenn Busic
H. C. Tucker
D. L. Francis
D. B. Eller
Bessie J. Cherry
Robert E. Williford
C. C. Campbell
J. E. Brown
R. C. Ratcliff
T. G. Bumgarner
W. D. Ratchford, Jr.
Mary H. Thompson
Caroline G. Halstead
A. H. James
G. M. Harris
Eunice Mauney
J. W. Drake
D. W. Ramsey
Lena M. Leary
Ralph A. Allison
Paul Wilson
L. J. Greer
Dorothy P. Pate
Marion B. Person
R. E. Saunders
C. S. Meekins
E. R. Everhart
Glenn L. Hammer
R. V. Wells
Alton Knight
Don Gilliam, Jr.
W. E. Church
Ralph S. Knott
George C. Holland
Curtis V. Powell
0. W. Hooper, Jr.
Mary C. Nelms
S. T. Barrow
J. P. Shore
Jacob C. Taylor
Elizabeth F. Matthews
J. B. Siler
J. Seldon Osteen
A. W. Greene
E. E. Smith
Walter A. Credle
C. G. Smith
Margaret W. Henson
COUNTY CLERK OF COURT
Johnston James C. Woodard
Jones Walter P. Henderson
Lee Sion H. Kelly
Lenoir J. S. Davis
Lincoln M. L. Huggins
Macon A. W. Perry
Madison C. N. Willis
Martin L. B. Wynne
McDowell Robert Jarrett, Sr.
Mecklenburg J. E. Stukes
Mitchell Guy Snyder
Montgomery C. M. Johnson
Moore CM. McLeod
Nash Ben H. Neville
New Hanover James G. McKeithan
Northampton R. J. White, Jr.
Onslow Everitte Barbee
Orange Frank S. Frederick
Pamlico Sadie W. Edwards
Pasquotank Naomi A. Chesson
Pender Frances N. Futch
Perquimans W. J. Ward
Person G. R. Perkins
Pitt D. T. House, Jr.
Polk R. S. McFarland
Randolph John H. Skeen
Richmond T. L. Covington
Robeson Ben G. Floyd
Rockingham J. Hoyte Stultz, Jr
Rowan Frank M. Montgomery
Rutherford Edgar W. Tanner
Sampson Charles A. Britt
Scotland James D. Nance
Stanly Joe H. Lowder
Stokes Robert Miller
Surry Martha 0. Comer
Swain H. H. Sandlin
Transylvania R. H. Caldwell
Tyrrell Melvin Pledger
Union Ethel M. Gordon
Vance H. W. Hight
Wake J. R. Nipper
Warren Lanie M. Hayes
Washington Louise S. Allen
Watauga Orville H. Foster
Wayne Shelton Jordan
Wilkes Wayne Yates
Wilson C. C. Lamm
Yadkin Lon H. West, Sr.
Yancey Fred Proffitt
ASSOCIATION OF CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT
President
1st Vice President
2nd Vice President
Treasurer
Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Frances F. Rufty, Rowan County
J. W. Drake, Chatham County
J. B. Siler, Haywood County
Zeb Weaver, Buncombe County
Institute of Government
Lena M. Leary, Chowan County
17 -
THE SUPERIOR COURT
There were 61/377 cases filed in the Superior Court during the
1965-66 fiscal year. This is an increase of 3.7$ over the previous year.
Dispositions increased 4.5$ over the previous year. The average number
of cases disposed of per judge, was 1322.
TOTAL CASES ADDED, AND DISPOSED OF IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966
AAAAA DDDDDD
Added Disposed of
7/1/63-
7/1/64-
7/1/65-
•6/30/64: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMAAAAAAAAAAJlUUUlAA
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
6/30/65: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
58,135
54,336
59,397
56,922
6/30/66: AMAAAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMAAAAAAAA 61,577
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 59,498
X...X...X...X...X...X.
10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000
Cases
by the
year.
7/1/64
7/1/65
7/1/66
Although dispositions continued to increase, they were exceeded
flow of new cases. The pending caseload increased 5$ during the
TOTAL CASES PENDING- IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
July I, 1964 - July 1, 1966
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 32,327
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 35,312
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 37,045
X X X X.
9,000 18,000 27,000 36,000
Cases
- 18 -
The court schedule was increased by 405 days. There was an
increase of 307 days in the amount of court utilized.
UTILIZATION OF SCHEDULED COURT
July 1, 1963 - June 30, 1966
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD PERCENTAGE
7/1/63 - 6/30/64 8513 7158^- 84.
7/1/64 - 6/30/65 8724 7155 82.
7/1/65 - 6/30/66 9129 7462i 81.7%
CIVIL DOCKETS
Most of the growth in the dockets occurred on the civil side.
There was a substantial increase of 12% in civil filings. There was an
even greater increase in dispositions. This figure increased 18.5 over
the previous year and 36% over the 63-64 court year.
CIVIL CASES ADDED, AND DISPOSED OF IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966
AAAAAA DDDDDD
Added Disposed of
7/1/63 - 6/30/64: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 23,675
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 20,998
7/1/64 - 6/30/65: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 26,699
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 24,089
7/1/65 - 6/30/66: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 29,944
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 28,557
X X X..
9,000 18,000 27,000
Cases
The volume of incoming cases was slightly in excess of out-going
cases. The pending civil caseload grew 3.6% during the year.
19 -
7/1/64
7/1/65
7/1/66
CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
July 1, 1964 - July 1, 1966
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
X . .
8,000
. X . .
16,000
Cases
X . .
24,000
Another county joined the group which has in excess of
500 civil cases pending.
DISTRIBUTION OF PENDING CIVIL CASES AMONG THE COUNTIES
Number of Cases
22,883
26,233
27,187
Number of Counties
jess than
50
50-100 101-200 201-500
1
Over
500
21 21 13 25 15
Approximately half of the civil business transacted in the
Superior Court occurred in ten counties. In these ten, 51$ of the
total civil filings for the year and 54$ of the civil dispositions
were recorded. Of the civil cases pending July 1, 1966, 45$ were in
these ten counties.
- 20 -
CONCENTRATIONS OP CIVIL CASES IN CERTAIN COUNTIES
PENDING
7/1/65
2027
ADDED DISPOSED OP PENDING
6/30/66
1880
UTI
OP
LIZATION
COURT
Wake 2010 2157 90.$
Cumberland 1431 2043 2306 1168 71.$
Guilford 1477 1591 1421 1647 73. $
Durham 853 563 584 832 82. $
Porsyth 866 1735 1776 825 89./*
Columbus 727 556 397 886 85.$
Mecklenburg 2668 4486 4506 2648 84.$
Wayne 755 334 388 701 84.$
Gaston 939 1259 1251 947 83.$
Davidson 645 727 564 808 96.
$
There was no substantial change in the currency of the civil
dockets. There was a shift of .7$ from the one year old to the two
year old group.
AGES OP PENDING CIVIL CASES
June 30, 1966
UNDER 6
:
6 to 12
MONTHS MONTHS
1 to 2
YEARS
OVER 2
YEARS
TOTAL
No. of Cases 8564 5396 5645 7555 27,160
Per Cent of
Total 31.5 19.8 ! 20.7 28 100$
Of the cases pending more than two years, 5984 were reported
as inactive. When only the active cases are considered, only 7.4$ are
over two years old.
- 21 -
CRIMINAL DOCKETS
For the second successive year there was a reduction in
the number of criminal cases filed. New cases decreased 3.25$ under
the previous year.
CRIMINAL CASES ADDED, AND DISPOSED OF IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
July 1, 1963 - June 30, 1966
AAAAA DDDDD
Added Disposed of
7/1/63-6/30/64: AAAMMMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 34,460
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 33,338
7/1/64-6/30/65: AAAAMAAAAAMAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 32,698
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 32,833
7/1/65-6/30/66 : AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 31,633
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 30,941
X X X
6 10,500 21,000 31,500
Cases
Dispositions were down 5.8 under the 1964-65 year. The
number of cases pending July 1, 1966 was 8.6$ above the July 1, 1965
number.
CRIMINAL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
July 1, 1964 - July 1, 1966
7/1/64 : PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 9 , 444
7/1/6 5 : PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 9,079
7/1/66 : PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP 9,858
. ...A,..7v...A...A...
2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
Cases
22 -
DISTRIBUTION OF PENDING CRIMINAL GASES
AMONG THE COUNTIES
Number of Cases
Number of Counties
Less than
50
50-100 101-200 201-500 Over
500
38 35 12 7 3
There were ten counties having more than 200 criminal cases
pending at the end of the year. Nine of these counties are on the list
which have the largest accumulations of civil cases. The transaction
of criminal business in these nine counties during the year was as
follows:
CASES FILED CASES DISPOSED OF CASES PENDING
6/30/66
Cumberland 1139 1021 347
Forsyth 1578 1496 428
Durham 1433 1438 398
Mecklenburg 2489 2726 400
Wake 1062 1197 581
Guilford 1872 1809 660
Gaston 1013 782 408
Davidson 506 440 336
Buncombe 1140 930 574
This group of counties accounted for 39$ of the criminal
cases filed in the Superior Court during the year, 38$ of the disposi-tions,
and 42$ of the cases pending at the end of the year.
- 23
In the limited number of counties where the accumulation
of criminal cases is such that some delay in trial may be encountered,
the problem lies in che shortage of courtroom facilities and prosecu-ting
officers. As to civil cases the problem is different. In many
jurisdictions it is the practice to assign to the court the responsi-bility
of moving forward with a case once it is filed. In this State
the general practice is to allow voluntary calendaring of cases by
counsel. Under this practice, delay must be measured from time of
readiness rather than from time of filing. When it is so measured,
there is no reported serious delay in this State. Even in what might
be referred to as our metropolitan districts where a lengthy waiting
period would be expected, cases are usually reached for trial within
six to twelve months of the filing date. This is remarkable in view
of the small number of Judges serving the Superior Court.
The Council of State Governments published a study entitled
"State Court Systems," revised in July, 1966. The numbers of judges
serving the trial courts of general jurisdiction of the respective
states appearing in the following table were taken from that study.
STATE POPULATION (i960) NUMBER OF JUDGES
Alabama 3,266,740 76
Colorado 1,753,947 69
Florida 4,951,560 119
Georgia 3,943,116 52
Indiana 4,662,498 129
Iowa 2,757,537 75
Kansas 2,178,611 57
Kentucky 3,038,156 68
- 24
Louisiana 3,257,022 81
Minnesota 3,431,864 65
Missouri 4,319,813 93
North Carolina 4,556,155 43
Oregon 1,768,687 53
Tennessee 3,567,089 79
Virginia 3,966,949 79
Washington 2,853,214 76
The average number of Judges in the 15 other States listed,
all but two of which have populations less than that of North Carolina,
is 78. The average number for the entire 50 States is 70.2.
- 25
DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL CASES
IN THE INFERIOR COURTS*
CONVICTION ACQUITTAL NOL PROS OTHER TOTAL
1963 257,^53 19,082 23,460 11,899 311,892
1964 285,356 19,44-6 24,372 9,937 339,111
1965 295,769 19,704 25,797 9,865 351,135
* Exclusive of Domestic Relations, Juvenile and Justice of the Peace Courts.
IN THE DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURTS
CONVICTION ACQUITTAL NOL PROS OTHER TOTAL
1963 4,844 1,464 1,045 312 7,662
1964 5,456 1,384 1,418 148 8,406
1965 5,362 1,614 1,398 147 8,521
IN THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURTS
7/1/63 - 6/30/64 - 138,763
7/1/64 - 6/30/65 - 135,231
7/1/65 - 6/30/66 - 132,294
- 26 -
TABLE A
CIVIL CASES PENDING, ADDED, AND DISPOSED OF IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS
BY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966
1ST DISTRICT
Camden
PENDING
7/1/65
DISPOSED OF
FILED JURY JUDGE OTHER TOT.
18 12
PENDING
6/30/66
20
GAIN OR
LOSS
- 1
Chowan
Pasquotank
6/1 A 5L ML
J&. 12 3L M.
ML
M.
=JL
Currituck 19 23 3 10 5 18 21 + 5
Dare
J37
25 6 8 15 39 33 - L
Gates ?-•? 31 3 7 18 28 28 + 3
•3
Perquimans p5 37 6 5 24. 35 57 + 2
Total 2U 24.7 35 51 162 24-8 257 - 1
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort 326 238 -a 79 60 180 384. +58
Hyde 12 18 3 8 11 19 + 7
Martin 1[70 199 37 28 129 194. 175 + 5
Washington 4? 61 9 11 23 4? 63 +18
Tyrrell 14. A 10 11 12. - 1
Total 573 i29_ JL 131 221 ML 660 +87
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret 566 J20_ 27 105 155 287 589 +83
Craven 628 167 JO 72 JJ. 141. 650 +22
Pitt 267 J2P_ u 135 101 280 317 +50
Pamlico J6 22 Jl 16 ±-1
Total U&l 903 102 320 321 7£t 1,612 +160
4.TH DISTRICT
Duplin _ J9J 261 1Z 14. JJ2. 210 J^8_ ±11
Jones 73 18 A. 11 JL jo. 86 + 8
Onslow J02 398 23 .71 174 272 428 +126
Sampson J3L 198 18 ?29 35L 335 -156
Total 1.1' 6 917 62 151 673 886 1,207 +31
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover 6i 54 656 138 421 161 720 590 -64
Pender
Total
_2J6_
890
103
759 14.0 422
78
_2J2_
81
801
258
848
+22
-42_
27 -
TABLE A CONT'D
PENDING DISPOSED OF PENDING GAIN OR
7A/65 FILED JURY JUDGE OTHER TOT. 6/^0/66 LOSS
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie
1
33 37 8 3 17
\
28 4-2 + 9
Halifax 148 122 27 73 33 133 137 -11
Hertford 110 66 9 13 16 38 138 +28
Northampton 57 90 10 39 32 81 66 + 9
Total 318 315 5A 128 98 280 383 +35
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe . 69 24 16 26 66 71 + 3
Nash 142 271 15 26 165 206 207 +65
Wilson 296 91 30 39 30 99 291 - 5
Total 506 13L 69 81 221 371 569 +63
8TH DISTRICT
Greene n 51 7 3 16 56 67 - 5
Lenoir 408 221 52 75 87 214 115 + 7
Wayne 755 334 73 218 97 388 701 -54
Total 1.235 606 132 296 230 658 1,183 -52
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin 32 13A 14. 16 77 107 59 +27
Granville 93 107 21 36 31 88 112 +19
Person \LL 76 5 9 5 19 201 +57
Vance 130 233 21 58 133 212 151 +21
Warren 96 33 2 2 26 30 99 + 3
Total 495 583 63 121 272 456 622 +127
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 2.027 2.010 620. ML 983 2.157 1.880 jML
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett 283 24.0 43 2 172 217 306 +23
Johnston 331 157 20 30 195 245 243 -88
Total 614. 397 63 32 367 462 549 -65
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 1.A31 2.043 131 1,198 977 2.306 1,168 -263
Hoke 150 82 8 13 55 76 156 + 6
Total 1.581 2,125 139 1.211 1,032 2,382 1,324 -257
- 28
TABLE A CONT'D
PENDING
7/1/65 FILED JURY
DISPOSED OF
JUDGE OTHER TOT.
PENDING
6/30/66
GAIN OR
LOSS
18TH DISTRICT
Guilford
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen 2b 174. 37 £2 93 ll2 263 + 2
Brunswick 3)L2 162 29 57 4.5 131 3£3 +31
Columbus 7Jf>7 556 61 135 201 397 886 +159
Total 1.300 892 127 234. 339 700 l.£92 +192
UTH DISTRICT
Durham 8 >3 563 57 91 £33 58£ 832 -21
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 2 32 £53 38 90 301 4.29 256 +2£
Chatham 197 168 21 4-8 59 128 237 +£0
Orange 63 221 29 96 88 213 71 + 8
Total £92 8£2 88 234. £4.8 770 56£ +72
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson 13£ £26 82 1££ 258 4.84. 76 -58
Scotland 162 183 23 81 85 189 156 - 6
Total 296 609 105 225 34.3 673 232 -6£
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell 38 4.6 1 10 37 £8 36 - 2
Rockingham £2£ 509 62 269 109 ££0 £93 +69
Stokes 25 25 19 19 31 + 6
Surry 271 158 2 37 104. 1£3 286 +15
Total 758 738 65 316 269 650 8£6 ^88
Greensboro 1.179 1.319 197 597 £16 1.210 1,288 +109
High Point 298 272 5£ 22 135 211 359 +61
Total l.£77 1.591 251 619 551 1.421 1.6£7 +170
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus £17 987 60 329 £10 799 605 +188
Montgomery £8 6£ 36 13 £9 63 +15
Randolph 350 283 £1 31 105 177 £56 +106
Rowan 130 575 £3 15£ 139 336 369 +239
Total 9£5 1.909 14A 550 667 1,361 l.£93 +5£8
- 29
TABLE A CONT'D
PENDING DISPOSED OF PENDING GAIN OR
7/1/65 FILED JURY JUDGE OTHER TOT. 6/30/66 LOSS
20TH DISTRICT
Anson 181 161 19 42 56 117 225 +44
Richmond 273 478 51 66 169 2^6 465 +192
Stanly <?2 34 9 27 36 90 - 2
Union ?2 67 21 8 35 fa 55 + 3
Total 598 740 100 116 287 503 835 +237
21 ST DISTRICT
Forsyth 866 1.735 252. 750 867 1.776 825 .z£l
22ND DISTRICT
\lexander ,39 55 4 26 32 62 32 - 7
Davidson 645 727 157 192 215 564 808 +163
Davie 31
190
140 10 54 58 122 49 +18
Iredell 261 30 161 100 291 160 -30
rotal cK)5 1.183 201 433 405 1.039 1.049 +144
23RD DISTRICT
Qleghanv 33 41 5 2 34 a 33
ishe J&. 66 20 40 65 50 + 1
Vilkes 151. 195 iZ. Ml 3L 183 270 +12
fadkin -85. Ill 40 J2. J2S. 100 +11
rotal 425 Ml 66 107 214 J87_ J£± +28
>4TH DISTRICT
Madison _4L 64 11 10 _41 66 J2_ - 2
Mitchell 32. 60 A Jl 10 11 i4. +ii
Vatauga 14, 11 12. JO XL 23 + 9
fancey 111 J2_ 4L 22 ^42. .22. •12
fotal 205 224 22. 84 107 214 215 +10
25TH DISTRICT
Burke 222. ^05_ 61 J21 123 _222. 175 -104
Caldwell 112. 329 M. 224 106 370 76 -=4L
rotal 32L. 23k. 103 ML 229 879 251 ^141
?6TH DISTRICT
Mecklenburg 2.668 4.486 21L. 900 2.892 4.506 2.648 -20
?7TH DISTRICT
Cleveland 293 322. 74 206 131 411 274 -19
}aston 939 1.259 116 830 305 1.251 947 + 8
Lincoln 78 193 7 81 77 165 106 +28
rotal 1,310 li844 197 1.117 513 1,827 1.327 +17
- 30 -
TABLE A CONT'D
PENDING
7/1/65 FILED JURY
DISPOSED OF
JUDGE OTHER TOT.
PENDING
6/30/66
28TH DISTRICT
GRAND TOTAL 25, 8P0 29,944- 4,261 10,400 13,896 28,557 27,187
GAIN OR
LOSS
Buncombe 5)
f3
502 73 199 159 43
1
! 594 +71
29TH DISTRICT
McDowell 8 195 26 85 22 ltt 140 +62
Polk 18 11 5 2 7 22 + 4
Rutherford 61 236 45 116 81 242 55 - 6
Transylvania 36 45 8 29 9 46 35 - 1
Total 193 487 79 235 114 428 252 +59
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee <15 42 6 3 40 49 18 - 7
Clay 5 7 6 6 6 + 1
Graham 17 45 2 4 8 14 48 +31
Haywood 171 309 30 151 110 291 189 +18
Jackson 114 92 18 14 35 67 139 +25
Macon 154 60 9 18 23 50 64 +10
Swain 49 69 4 16 24 44. 74 +25
Total 435 624 69 212 240 521 538 +103
+1,387
NOTE: Five counties are missing from Tables A,
failed to furnish necessary data.
C and D. The Clerks in these counties
- 31 -
TABLE B
UTILIZATION OF CIVIL COURT TERMS
BY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
1ST DISTRICT
Camden 7 3 L
Chowan 9 3 1/2 5 1/2
Currituck 11 6 1/2 L 1/2
Dare 12 10 2
Gates 6 5 1
Pasquotank 38 32 6
Perquimans 11 L 7
Total 9L GU 30
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort £5 31 1/2 13 1/2
Hyde L 2 1/2 1 1/2
Martin 29 13 5/6 15 1/6
Tyrrell 14 1/2 7 7 1/2
Washington 6 2 1/2 3 1/2
Total 98 1/2 57 1 £1 1/6
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret 50 38 12
Craven 56 £0 1/2 15 1/2
Pamlico 7 5 2
Pitt 39 28 1/2 10 1/2
Total 152 112 AO
4.TH DISTRICT
Duplin £0 23 17
Jones U 8 6
Onslow 52 35 17
Sampson 55 3A 21
Total 161 100 61
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover 135 123 12
Pender 28 17 1/2 10 1/2
Total 163 uo 1/2 22 1/2
- 32 -
TABLE B CONT'D
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie
DAYS SCHEDULED
16
DAYS HELD
9 1/2
DAYS UNUSED
6 1/2
Halifax 52-7-
12 1/2
42 1/2 7 1/2
Hertford 10
15 1/2
2 1/2
Northampton 22 ^_ 1 1/2
Total 95 1/2 77 1/2 18
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe JO. 23 1/2 6 1/2
Nash 65 i4. li
Wilson -51 48
125 1/2
_7
Total 24 1/2
8TH DISTRICT
150
Greene 14 1/2 10 4 1/2
Lenoir 75 61 1/2 13 1/2
Wayne 69 58 11
Total 158 1/2 129 L 29
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin 25 21 4
Granville 21 14 7
Person 43 26 1/2 16 1/2
Vance 20 18 1/2 1 1/2
Warren 10 5 5
Total 119 85 34
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 292 262 30
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett 100 83 17
Lee 43 40 3
Johnston 85 65 20
Total 228 188 40
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 180 128 52
Hoke 10 1/2 7 3 1/2
Total 190 1/2 135 55 1/2
- 33 -
TABLE B CONT'D
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen 17 15 1/2 1 1/2
Brunswick 50 A5 5
Columbus 65 55 10
Total 132 115 1/2 16 1/2
LOT DISTRICT
Durham 162 133 29
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 75 56 1/2 18 1/2
Chatham 30 15 15
Orange 50 40 10
Total 155 111 1/2 13 1/2
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson 85 59 1/2 25 1/2
Scotland 30 19 11
Total 115 78 1/2 36 1/2
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell 10 3 7
Rockingham 70 53 17
Stokes 5 1 L
Surry 50 30 1/2 19 1/2
Total 135 87 1/2 LI 1/2
18TH DISTRICT
Guilford 373 272 101
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus 57 AO 17
Montgomery 5 1 L
Randolph 115 97 18
Rowan 36 31 5
Total 213 169 LL
20TH DISTRICT
Anson 30 21 9
Moore 20 16 L
Richmond 55 39 16
Stanly 15 8 1/2 6 1/2
Union 29 27 1/2 1 1/2
Total 14? 112 37
- 34 -
TABLE B CONT'D
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
21ST DISTRICT
Forsyth 260 231 29
22ND DISTRICT
Alexander 10 7 3
Davidson 90 86 A
Davie 17 11 1/2 5 1/2
Iredell 35 27 1/2 7 1/2
Total 152 132 20
23RD DISTRICT
Alleghany 12 6 6
Ashe 10 L 6
Wilkes 70 52 18
Yadkin 17 15 2
Total 109 77 32
2ATH DISTRICT
Avery 15 9 1/2 5 1/2
Madison 35 30 5
Mitchell 20 11 9
Watauga 10 6 U
Yancey 15 12 3
Total 95 68 1/2 26 1/2
25TH DISTRICT
Burke 55 52 3
Caldwell A3 31 1/2 11 1/2
Catawba U2 36 6
Total 1A0 119 1/2 20 1/2
26TH DISTRICT
Mecklenburg 632 531 101
27TH DISTRICT
Cleveland 30 1/2 28 1/2 2
Gaston 185 15A 31
Lincoln 19 16 3
Total 23A 1/2 198 1/2 36
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 24? 227 18
- 35
TABLE B CONT'D
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
29TH DISTRICT
Henderson 20 13 7
McDowell 20 18 2
Polk 5 1/2 L 1/2 1
Rutherford 30 27 3
Transylvania 13 13 1/2 -1/2
Total SB 1/2 76 12 1/2
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee 16 7 1/2 8 1/2
Clay 4 1 3
Haywood 40 33 7
Graham 9 7 2
Jackson 6 1/2 3 3 1/2
Macon 7 1/2 5 1/2 2
Swain L 1 1/2 2 1/2
Total 87 58 1/2 28 1/2
GRAND TOTAL 5,379 4,274 l/3 1,104 2/3
- 56 -
TABLE C
AGES OF CASES PENDING ON CIVIL ISSUE DOCKETS
June 30, 1966
UNDER 6 6 TO 12 1 TO 2 OVER 2
MONTHS MONTHS YEARS YEARS TOTAL
1ST DISTRICT
Camden 7 3 3 7 20
Chowan 16 A 9 17 A6
Currituck 5 8 2 A 19
Dare A A 11 1A 33
Gates 10 7 5 6 28
Pasquotank 10 10 7 22 A9
Perquimans 12 7 8 30 57
Total 6A A3 A5 100 252
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort 67 98 28 191 38A
Hyde 2 3 A 5 1A
Martin A5 31 22 77 175
Tyrrell 5 A 5 5 19
Washington 15 8 12 18 53
Total 13A 1AA 71 296 6A5
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret 127 5A 77 331 589
Craven 75 50 150 375 650
Pamlico 1A 9 12 21 56
Pitt 73 50 56 138 317
Total 289 163 295 865 1.612
ATH DISTRICT
Duplin 61 51 71 175 358
Jones 2A 5 1A A3 86
Onslow 295 64. AA 236 639
Sampson 85 80 55 115 335
Total A65 200 18A 569 1,A18
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover 1A1 149 1A8 152 590
- 37
TABLE C CONT'D
UNDER 6
MONTHS
6 TO 12
MONTHS
1 TO 2
YEARS
OVER 2
YEARS TOTAL
t>TH DISTRICT
Bertie 2 2 20 18 42
Halifax 26 21 26 64 137
Hertford 26 21 LI 50 138
Northampton 17 9 3 37 66
Total 71 53 90 169 383
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe 32 21 12 6 71
Nash 39 42 35 76 192
Wilson 25 60 39 167 291
Total 96 123 86 249 55A
8TH DISTRICT
Greene 3 4 13 LB 68
Lenoir B8 L5.3 68 116 415
Wayne 41 184. 130 346 701
Total 132 331 211 510 1.184
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin 5 20 21 13 59
Granville 55 22 18 17 112
Warren 7 6 31 55 99
Total 67 48 70 85 270
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 635 452 485 308 1,880
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett 58 47 55 148 308
Johnston 62 51 70 60 243
Total 120 98 125 208 551
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 545 272 565 502 1.884
Hoke 38 57 32 45 172
Total 583 329 597 ?47 2,056
- r58
TABLE C CONT'D
UNDER 6 6 TO 12 1 TO 2 OVER 2
MONTHS MONTHS YEARS YEARS TOTAL
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen 100 80 53 10 243
Brunswick 76 67 108 92 343
Columbus 230 152 220 284 886
Total 406 299 381 386 1.472
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 220 145 230 237 832
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 159 42 28 27 256
Chatham 39 38 40 120 237
Orange 9 12 27 23 71
Total 207 92 95 170 564
16TH DISTRICT
Scotland 76 38 16 26 156
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell 6 20 10 36
Rockingham 153 77 106 157 493
Stokes 5 13 8 5 31
Surry 72 31 38 U5 286
Total 236 141 162 307 846
18TH DISTRICT
Greensboro 505 197 235 351 1.288
High Point 120 73 103 63 359
Total 625 270 338 414 1.647
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus 287 130 111 77 605
Randolph 67 189 70 130 456
Rowan 117 82 82 88 369
Total 471 401 263 295 1.430
39 -
Tim* n nmrr»n
UNDER 6 6 TO 12 1 TO 2 OVER 2
MONTHS MONTHS YEARS YEARS TOTAL
20TH DISTRICT
Anson J2 22 122 28
Richmond US §2 IS 2U,
?twly iZ 12 42.
Ufii9B S IP 10 16- 2L
stfligy 2 12 15- £2 20. T5 10 10 16
I2tal 15 1?? 237 3Z S2L
21ST DISTRICT
Porsrth 22S 125 2^ MB 8J1_
22ND DISTRICT
Haaate 12 15 2 o *?
Davidson 190 160 209 2A9 808
Davie 14 11 12 7
IggflfiH 42 42 2g 42 ^24 _ _ _ 160
Total 26Z, 228. 254, 303 1.049
23RD DISTRICT
AUaatoM S 11 12 1 21
M2S 2Z 2 % S 5Q_
Wilkes 53 24 26 16 119
Yadkin 20 23 21 36 100
Total 108 61 62 71 302
24TH DISTRICT
Mft<UBffl 11 S 11 2 22.
Mitchell u 12 5 IS 54.
Watauga 12 L g Q 2j_
Yancev 26 16 57 99
Total 169 16 75 25 215
25TH DISTRICT
Bate 112 22 22 2 J2L
Caldwell 94 zl 20 3 145
T^fll a? 22 49 S 3?P
am pigTMPT
^cKlenfarg 1,422 5fe4 254 238 2.648
- 40 -
TABLE C CONT'D
UNDER 6
MONTHS
6 TO 12
MONTHS
1 TO 2
YEARS
OVER 2
YEARS TOTAL
27TH DISTRICT
Cleveland 128 63 57 26 274
Gaston 377 199 130 224 930
Lincoln 51 33 12 10 106
Total 556 295 199 260 1.310
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 221 131 149 92 593
29TH DISTRICT
McDowell 48 LL 32 16 140
Rutherford 23 17 6 9 55
Total 71 61 38 25 195
30TH DISTRICT
Clay 4 2 6
Graham 19 11 7 21 58
Haywood 81 58 30 20 189
Jackson 26 25 33 55 139
Macon 16 6 17 25 64.
Swain 15 16 14 29 74
Total 161 118 101 150 530
GRAND TOTAL 8,564 5,396 5,645 7,555 27,160
- 41 -
TABLE D
CRIMINAL CASES PENDING, ADDED, AND DISPOSED OF IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS
BY SOLICITORI.AL DISTRICTS
July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966
PENDING
2/1/61. FILED JURY
DISPOSED OF
JUDGE OTHER TOT,
PENDING
6/30/66
GAIN OR
LOSS
1ST DISTRICT
Currituck 12 32. 20 2 26 +14-
Camden 17 -24- -10- _1. 10 - 7
Pasquotank 227 j±§£: i± •79- £0 121 214. :il
Gates 22 11 +10
Perquimans 11 61 X 6 26 iP_ +21
Chowan 21 60 31 +12
Dare 31 •36—- 18- 21 -22. - l
Beaufort 2QL -a5»- -2jL_-__M4 -24. 208 84. +4.7
Hyde 8 -le- 12 2L - 6
Tyrrell 20 J.. -is— A. .21 J=_l
Total 38 9 681 85 365 145 596 4.75 +86
2ND DISTRICT
Edgecombe 136 ^m— ft ~~m ,, 332 132 + 6
Nash 164 -tan—- -38- i2£2_ -160' 321. 84 -80
Wilson 72 J3b~- - 40—
—
"""504"- 632 3L +22
Martin 87 12 -•38 -Mkz 2J6. -81
Washington JL -20. 17 -22. - 2
Total 454 1.624. 154. 1.108 _427_ 1*231 -212. -L21
3RD DISTRICT
Bertie J6 o9 ^6. 11 .=_!
Halifax 77 186- J£ — -151"
I2T" 230 33 _z44
Hertford M. ii£ -16- -63r 3& ill .51 + 6
Northampton J28. -59- -.TO -TO--' J4. .41 +_1
Vance _4Q_„_ —--92~ 261 38
Warren .50. .44 11 i>2_ 22 -=11
Granville 196- -10- £2= 121 .IL ±-l
Total ^8. .32. 627 292 1.008 236 -=12.
4TH DISTRICT
Harnett 85 —7£- 147 78 - 7
Johnston
42 -
TABLE D CONT'D
PENDING DISPOSED OF PENDING GAIN OR
7/1/65 FILED JURY JUDGE OTHER TOT. 6/30/66 LOSS
5TH DISTRICT
Carteret ip_ -i?e— -19 -50. 78 ML 21 +21
Craven l63 —??— -2S5~ -6Ar- _4PA 171 + 8
Pitt 11 £8£ 61 232 111 4.04. 161 +80
Greene 28 -S8^- 16 -2L. 22 ^1 25 ^J_
Jones -21 ^£ ^5_ _21 iP_ -21 + 2
Pamlico 16 -H" ±^ 2L - 8
Total 393 1.229 161 652. 305 1,127 495 +102
6TH DISTRICT
Duplin -^37—- £7 76 36 139 JL - 2
Onslow 99 368- -38: 142 -82" 282 125 +26
Lenoir 12 .362 105^" 127 12/. J^6. 89 + 6
Sampson il ~2gg- 3£ 127 76 253 82 +19
Total 283 1.079 220 J£L 318 1.030 332 +4.9
7TH DISTRICT
Columbus
Wake 716 1,062 242 50A £52 1.197 581 -135
Franklin 6A -89- -?~ -—26 25 68 85 +21
Total 780 1,151 24.8 54.0 4.77 1,265 666 -1U
8TH DISTRICT
Brunswick 15
— —t-tf
—
7 16 2 25 AS +23
18 258 .29_ 206 22 231 12. + 1
New Hanover 25 2t£3Q -49-— 1.176 -e- 1, 22 5 -20. + 5
Pender 2L 16 4.0 35 91 10 -21
Total 89 1.616 101 1.A38 59 1.598 107 +18
9TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 229 209^ 4B7 325 1.021 ML +118
Hoke 32. JJL8- __14_ _4i_ JL 88 62 +20.
Total 261 1.257 223 ^P_ 256 UP? £09 +1£8
9TH A DISTRICT
Bladen IL 464. — 94. _27_ Ik. 135 13 +29
Robeson 137 J&±— 101 277 i26- JQA. 167 +30
Total
10TH DISTRICT
Durham
2SL 698 195 .29-L. UP ii9_
-4Q3. 3^33—138 894. 4.06 1.A38
210
398
±22_
jiJL
43 -
TABLE D CONT'D
PENDING
7/1/65 FILED JURY
DISPOSED OF
JUDGE OTHER TOT,
PENDING
6/30/66
10TH A DISTRICT
Alleghany A 190 221 Jl
GAIN OR
LOSS
Alamance 1M 525 106 422 76 604 65 -79
Chatham i 229 49 106 53 208 95 +21
Person 46 54 10 ~- 50 24-- 84 16 -30
Orange 138 311- 39 133 100 272 177 +39
Total £022 1.119 20£ 711 253 1,168 353 -49
11TH DISTRICT
^_1
Ashe 106 276 242 -5L 222 3SL -27
Forsyth 346 1.578 121 1.006 369 1.496 _428_ +82
Total 488 2.044 135 1.420 _42Z 1 ,992 jm. ±ZL
12TH DISTRICT
Davidson 270 506 65 210 165 440 32L +66
Guilford
Greensboro 372 1.289 197 647 500 1.344 317 .=51
High Point 225 igi 41 280 142 ML J4J. +118
Total 867 2.378 305 1.137 807 2.249 _22L +129
13TH DISTRICT
Anson 26 88 46 -25_ 80 -24. + 8
Richmond 60 _295_ J2_ 252. JZ1 266 .22. +22.
Stanly 88 _175_ 8 164 22 185 78 -10
Union .55. J^l 18 J2. 122 192 18 -37
Scotland 21 203 22 139 161 62 +42
Total 250 926 82. 421 JLL 884 292 +42.
14TH DISTRICT
Gaston
TABLE D CONT'D
16TH DISTRICT
Burke
PENDING
7/1/6?
DISPOSED OF
PILED JURY JUDGE OTHER TOT,
lk uo J£0 71 M.
PENDING
6/30/66
i4.
GAIN OR
LOSS
-50
Caldwell -& 183 +108
Cleveland J2L ^^ 14. 205 86 178 +87
Lincoln 28 -32: -±0- 21 - 7
Watauga 231 668 .22- -132
Total 529 1,660 166 1,223 265 1& 121 + 6
17TH DISTRICT
Mitchell 101 gg- 103 71 -30
Wilkes 11 22_ -—?g 14, 161 il +24
Davie 24. ^60- 17 24 58 36 + 2
Yadkin H —36- 50 29 +14
Total 181 4-26 42. 169 198 123, +10
18TH DISTRICT
McDowell 80 114. 108 277
209
21 - 7
Rutherford JL 56" 80 +48
Polk 21 -isa- & 24. ia. 122 +84,
Yancey 50 19 ~~
_j7_ J52. 72 +22
Transylvania 26 ^T— 24- 21 22 _£.
Total 239 221 94 340 216 650. 382 J241
19TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 364. 1O40- 136. -62a 174 .220 224. +210
Madison 122 .-172- -6
—
66 123 195 .22. ^21
Total 486 1.312 142 686 297 1,125 673 +187
20TH DISTRICT
Clay M. 120— iH -e~ 141 21 -23
Cherokee JP_ -21- 12. 22- - 1
Graham 23L 237 179 4-8 229 -42. + 8
Haywood 159 296 38 199 28 U- 190 ill
Jackson 4-6 625- 15L 417 EZ4. 21 +SL
Macon 125 Jii. 76 422 132 + 7
Swain 21 196 _H 118 JA. 201 -24. .=-1
Total A77 1.934 81 1,14-2 64.3 1.866 141 +68
21ST DISTRICT
Caswell
7
22 21 11 64 11 121
Rockingham 206 Ml 8 .441 126 12P_ 21 -117
Stokes » 21 11 2L 1P_2_ 11 -18
Surry 62 460 20 287 14-6 AH 62. + 7
Total 319 1.123 21 824 363 1.216 226 j£l
GRAND TOTAL 9,166 31,633 3,564 18,672
. 45 _
8,705 30,9a 9,858 +692
TABLE E
UTILIZATION OF CRIMINAL COURT TERMS
BY SOLICITORIAL DISTRICTS
July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1966
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
1ST DISTRICT
Currituck 2 6 l/2 2 l/2
Camden "&-—
.. 6 2
Pasquotank -2-g~ -18- 4
Gates S— v~~6-
—
3
Perquimans 3jP -&-1/2 2 1/2
Chowan —13r~ ^-9— 2
Dare -&~ ~^S—
Tyrrell -5~±f2- —k— 1 l/2
"
Hyde ^4^ -J+— 2
Beaufort -60- -2^l/2- 5 1/2
Total 117 1/2 92 1/2 25
2ND DISTRICT
Edgecombe 25 ii_ £
Nash -50- £2- 8
Wilson ^ft— -52— 7
Martin 1-6- -1Q-3/3- 5 1lZZ1
Washington -J&- ^-l/2- 1/2
Total m U3 1/6 30 5/6
3RD DISTRICT
Bertie |g *±g-l/g~ 6 l/2
Halifax 30 -£3"T/2 6 1/2
Hertford 17-1/2- S5gE 3
Northampton ~±-3" ~-H
—
2
Vance -2-5 51Elg§ 6 IS!
Warren 15 42r 3
Granville -±9 -17 1/2- 1 1/2
Total 138 1/2 109 1/2 29
- 46 -
TABLE E CONT'D
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
4.TH DISTRICT
Harnett ~4£r- ^h- 9
Johnston -A&- -30- 10
Lee ~9Ff- ^8- 9
Wayne -§i~- -4&- 3
Total 158 127 31
5TH DISTRICT
Carteret ^S- ~±3r- A
Craven ^U- -35-H72 8 1/2
Pamlico -i3_ -e- 5
Pitt -63^- -*±-±/2~ 19 1/2
Greene 4T1/2 5 1/2
Jones ^U -5-l72~ 7 1/2
Total 157 1/2 107 1/2 50
6TH DISTRICT
Duplin ££— ~^rT/2 9 1/2
Onslow ^8_ -21 l/2 6 1/2
Lenoir §& *5- 5
Sampson -as- S2-1/2- 2 1/2
Total 128 104. 1/2 23 1/2
7TH DISTRICT
Wake -tt^ 22+6~l7^ U 1/2
Franklin ^5- ±3-- 2
Total 260 253 1/2 6 1/2
8TH DISTRICT
Brunswick ^e- -8 1/2 1 1/2
Columbus ~^r~ ^r- 9
New Hanover 96- -80- 10
Pender -12 r^-ite- 2 1/2
Total 157 134. 23
9TH DISTRICT
Cumberland ^5€h l2tO-l:/2 9 1/2
Hoke ±hr±fe -i^~ 1 1/2
Total 164. 1/2 153 1/2 11
- 47 -
TABLE E CONT'D
9TH A DISTRICT
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
Bladen *8
—
i6-l/2~ 1 1/2
Robeson 96- -83r~l/2 8 1/2
Total 108 98 10
10TH DISTRICT
Durham -17-5 159 16
10TH A DISTRICT
Alamance -55- -56-1/2 -1 1/2
Chatham ^r -2-3 2
Person ^6 ia-1/a 3 1/2
Orange *^2$r -28-^/2^ 1/2
Total 125 120 1/2 A 1/2
11TH DISTRICT
Alleghany -8- -6~±/2 1 1/2
Ashe ^r- 10^ 5
Forsyth -1-76- ±58 12
Total 193 17A 1/2 18 1/2
12TH DISTRICT
Davidson U£- ffL 1/8- 3 1/2
Guilford 272 ^18 54-
Total 317 259 1/2 57 1/2
13TH DISTRICT
Anson -W ~6— 7
Moore 15 ±2- 3
Richmond ^5- v2i A
Stanly &r 12 l/2 2 1/2
Union -20" -18- 2
Scotland -20 17- 3
Total 110 88 1/2 21 1/2
UTH DISTRICT
Gaston 100 -92- 8
UTH A DISTRICT
Mecklenburg -23* -259-- U
- 48
TABLE E CONT'D
DAIS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
15TH DISTRICT
Rowan -¥t~ -35^ A
Cabarrus ~23~ -30~ 3
Randolph 4S- a i/a 6 1/2
Montgomery- -2£, -S- 17
Alexander -5- -*~ 2
Iredell 4$. £8-±/2 6 1/2
Total 152 113 39
16TH DISTRICT
Burke -30- -29— 1
Caldwell ~32~ ~ -28-1/2- 3 1/2
Cleveland *-»-a*fe ^29-1/2'"
Lincoln 16 10 6
Watauga <4£- - 12 3
Catawba -53 - -tT 6
Total 175 1/2 156 19 1/2
17TH DISTRICT
Avery ~15—
-
• —
"
""Ton/? U 1/2
Mitchell «=3£- —6-— U
Wilkes -30- -21
9
Yadkin -±3-- -9-^/2- 3 1/2
Davie -±3— -f
—
A
Total 81 5.6 25
18TH DISTRICT
Yancey -3=§^ ^12 l/g- 2 l/2
McDowell -35— r^r
Rutherford ^50~" -30"
Polk l9-2^~" -Jtt/2 U
Henderson -20—
;
-±6~~ 4,
Transylvania —7 —6"^
1
Total 126 1/2 ' 109 17 1/2
19TH DISTRICT
Buncombe -H5~ -±0^ 11
Madison -20
—
T3
—
7
Total 135 117 18
- 49 -
TABLE E CONT'D
DAYS SCHEDULED DAYS HELD DAYS UNUSED
20TH DISTRICT
Cherokee ±t 12 2
Clav 6 L 2
Graham 6 ^
Haywood 30 28 2
Jackson 28 1/2 -25 1/2 3
Macon 17 1/2 -1A 1/2 3
Swain 12 9 1/2 2 1/2
Total 11A 99 1/2 \L 1/2
21ST DISTRICT
Caswell 10 •53/1 L lA
Rockingham 50 33 1/2 16 1/2
Stokes 20 8 12
Surry 40 22 18
Total 120 69 \/L 50 3/1
GRAND TOTAL 3,760 3,195 11/12 56£ 1/12
- 10 -
TABLE F
OASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURT
BY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
DECEMBER 31 ; 1966
CIVIL CRIMINAL
1ST DISTRICT
12TH DISTRICT
TOTAL
Camden 2 13 15
Chowan 3 40 43
Currituck 12 12
Dare 1 33 34
Gates 31 31
Pasquotank 11 42 53
Perquimans 1 39 40
Total 18 210 228
Cumberland 73 5 1, 911 2,646
Hoke 73 46 119
Total 808 1, 957 2, 76 5
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 1, 561 103 1,664
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson 46 56 7 613
Scotland 6 186 192
Total 52 753 80 5
2 5TH DISTRICT
Burke 17 133 150
Caldwell 21 247 268
Catawba 46 172 218
Total 84 552 636
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee 58 58
Clay 35 35
Graham 2 36 38
Haywood 13 24 37
Jackson 5 12 17
Macon 7 104 111
Swain 1 73 74
Total 28 342 3 70
GRAND TOTAL 2. 551
- 51 -
3,917 6,468
North Carina State Library
Raleigh
STATE LIBRARY OF NORTH CAROLINA
3 3091 00748 3209