Vanstory v. . Thornton
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil actiont, heard upon complaint and demurrer at May Term, 1891, of Cumberland Superior Court, Armfield, J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Civil actiont, heard upon complaint and demurrer at May Term, 1891, of Cumberland Superior Court, Armfield, J., presiding. The complaint alleges, in substance, that the defendant’s homestead and personal property exemption were duly laid off to him on the 20th day of April, 1885; that the homestead embraced the land specified; that afterwards, the dwellings and buildings so laid off were burned and destroyed ; that at the time of the said laying off the plaintiff was not a creditor of the defendant; that after such buildings were so burned and destroyed, the defendant erected on the said…
1Opinion of the CourtMerrimon, C. J.
after stating the case: The Constitution (Art. 10, § 2) provides that “ every homestead and the dwellings and buildings used therewith, not exceeding in value one thousand dollars, to be selected by the owner thereof, or in lieu thereof, at the option of the owner, any lot in a city, town or village, with the dwelling and buildings used thereon, owned and occupied by any resident of this State, and not exceeding the value of one thousand dollars, shall be exempt from sale under execution or other final process obtained on any debt,” etc. Thus the Constitution defines and limits what shall…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gully v. . ColeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- Gulley v. . ColeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Thornton v. VanstorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
3Cited by9 opinions
- Chadbourn Sash, Door & Blind Co. v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Vanstory v. ThorntonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Vanstory v. . ThorntonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- McCaskill v. . McKinnonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
- C. J. Shoaf & Co. v. FrostSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.