28 U.S.C. § 113

Historical and Revision Notes

Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, § 98 36 Stat. 1120 Oct. 7, 1914, ch. 318 38 Stat. 728 Mar. 17, 1920, ch. 101, § 1 41 Stat. 531 June 7, 1924, ch. 359, § 1 43 Stat. 661 Dec. 24, 1924, ch. 18 43 Stat. 721 June 12, 1926, ch. 566 44 Stat. 734 June 22, 1926, ch. 645 44 Stat. 758 June 22, 1926, ch. 646 44 Stat. 758 Mar. 2, 1927, ch. 276 44 Stat. 1339 Apr. 25, 1928, ch. 432 45 Stat. 457 May 10, 1928, ch. 516 45 Stat. 495 Feb. 20, 1933, ch. 107 47 Stat. 859 Feb. 28, 1933, ch. 133 47 Stat. 1350 June 28, 1935, ch. 330 49 Stat. 429 June 24, 1936, ch. 744 49 Stat. 1898 June 24, 1936, ch. 759 49 Stat. 1910 Aug. 17, 1937, ch. 688 50 Stat. 671 Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 179 (, ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , ; , §§ 1, 2, ; , ; , ; , ).

References to civil and criminal terms at Raleigh were omitted as more properly the subject of rule of court.

section 179 of title 28The following language at the end of , U.S.C., 1940 ed., was omitted: “There shall be a judge appointed for the said middle district in the manner now provided by law who shall receive the salary provided by law for the judges of the eastern and western districts, and a district attorney, marshal, clerk, and other officers in the manner and at the salary now provided by law. All causes in the said middle district in equity, bankruptcy, or admiralty, in which orders and decrees have already been made and which are now in process of trial, shall continue and remain subject to the jurisdiction of the judge of that district by whom the same shall have been made and before whom the same shall have been partially tried and determined.”

The first sentence is superfluous in view of other sections of this title governing the appointment and compensation of the judges, clerks and marshals of the district courts and of district attorneys. The last sentence is obsolete, having been enacted in 1927, and being limited to cases affected by the creation of the middle district.

Provisions for maintenance of offices by the clerks at certain cities were omitted. (See Reviser’s Note under sections 452 and 751 of this title.)

Provisions for furnishing rooms and accommodations at Durham, Rockingham, and Winston-Salem were omitted as obsolete upon advice of the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that Federal accommodations are now available in such places.

section 142 of this titleThe provisions respecting court accommodations at Bryson City and Shelby were omitted as covered by .

Changes in arrangement and phraseology were made.

Editorial Notes

Amendments

Pub. L. 117–26, § 1(a)(1)2021—Subsec. (a). , substituted “Wilson, those portions of Hoke, Moore, Scotland, and Richmond counties encompassing the Fort Bragg Military Reservation and Camp Mackall, and” for “and Wilson and”.

Pub. L. 117–26, § 1(a)(2)Subsec. (b). , added subsec. (b) and struck out former subsec. (b) which read as follows: “The Middle District comprises the counties of Alamance, Cabarrus, Caswell, Chatham, Davidson, Davie, Durham (excluding that portion of Durham County encompassing the Federal Correctional Institution, Butner, North Carolina), Forsythe, Guilford, Hoke, Lee, Montgomery, Moore, Orange, Person, Randolph, Richmond, Rockingham, Rowan, Scotland, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, and Yadkin.” Amendment directing striking out subsec. (b) was executed only to the first paragraph and not the concluding sentence, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Pub. L. 102–2721992—Subsec. (a). , which directed the amendment of subsec. (a) by striking out “Clinton,” and “Washington,” and inserting “Greenville,” after “Fayetteville,”, was executed to the second sentence to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Pub. L. 96–462, § 5(a)1980—Subsec. (a). , added that portion of Durham County encompassing the Federal Correctional Institution, Butner, North Carolina to the Eastern District.

Pub. L. 96–462, § 5(b)Subsec. (b). , struck out references to Alleghany, Ashe, Watauga, and Wilkes counties in the list of counties comprising the Middle District; inserted “(excluding that portion of Durham County encompassing the Federal Correctional Institution, Butner, North Carolina)” in first sentence as the probable intent of Congress; and struck out Rockingham, Salisbury, and Wilkesboro as places for holding court.

Pub. L. 96–462, § 5(c)Subsec. (c). , added Alleghany, Ashe, Watauga, and Wilkes counties to the Western District.

Pub. L. 89–3191965— provided for holding court at Clinton.

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date of 2021 Amendment

Pub. L. 117–26, § 1(b)July 6, 2021135 Stat. 299 July 6, 2021, , , provided that “The amendments made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall not apply to any action commenced or pending in any judicial district of North Carolina before the date of enactment of this Act [].”

Effective Date of 1980 Amendment; Savings Provisions

Pub. L. 96–462Oct. 1, 1981Oct. 1, 1981section 7 of Pub. L. 96–462section 84 of this titleAmendment by effective , but not to affect the composition or preclude the service of any grand or petit juror summoned, empaneled, or actually serving in any judicial district on , see , set out as a note under .

Pub. L. 96–462, § 5(d)Oct. 15, 198094 Stat. 2054