Legal Opinion

Oxendine v. Lewis

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 14, 1960No. 741PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggiNS, J.

Involved in this' action are apparently conflicting provisions of a deed. The court is called upon to resolve the conflict. In order that its judgment may be binding on all parties in interest and be a final termination of the controversy, the court should have before it all the heirs at law of Melinda Oxendine Hunt. The absent heirs are not bound by the judgment in a cause to which they are not parties. Our procedure requires that they be brought in and given an opportunity to be heard. Britt v. Children’s Homes, 249 N.C. 409, 106 S.E. 2d 474; Morganton v. Hutton & Bourbonnais Co., 247 N.C.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Town of Morganton v. Hutton & Bourbonnais Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
  2. Edmondson v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Britt v. BAPTIST CHILDREN'S HOMES OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Oxendine v. LewisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company v. CarrSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. Bank of Wadesboro v. JordanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  4. Paschal v. AutrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. North Carolina State Highway Commission v. GambleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

1 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