Legal Opinion

Collins v. . Bass

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 18, 1929PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClakksoN, J.

The question involved: Is the purchaser at a foreclosure sale under a mortgage entitled to recover possession of the prop erty from a lessee or tenant of mortgagor, claiming to bold under a lease made after maturity of tbe mortgage indebtedness? We tbink so.

In Jones v. Hill, 64 N. C., 199-200, citing numerous authorities, tbe law is tbus stated: “If a mortgagor remains in possession after tbe forfeiture of tbe property, be remains only by permission of tbe mortgágee. In sueb case tbe mortgagor bas been sometimes called a tenant at will or sufferance, and sometimes a trespasser;, but be is…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Lehigh Water Co. v. EastonSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. Killebrew v. . HinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  3. Wooten v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  4. O'Kelly v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
  5. Steele v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gregg v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Swindell v. OvertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  3. Dixon v. OsborneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. Dixon v. . OsborneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  5. Swindell v. OvertonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API