Montford v. Grohman
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
VAUGHN, Judge.
It is helpful in viewing this matter to differentiate carefully between the issue actually before us and those which were decided by the magistrate on 27 July 1976. No appeal was taken from that judgment, and the parties may not now attack it or attempt to review the matters decided there. That judgment established the validity of Beneficial’s security interest and the fact of plaintiff’s default on her obligation. It also established the extent of the security interest which included “[ajl of the household furniture and furnishings, electrical and gas appliances, including…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- New Amsterdam Casualty Company, and Cross-Appellant v. Gladys N. Waller, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1963
- First National Bank of Amarillo v. LaJoieSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1975
- State Ex Rel. Scott & Burton v. KenanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- Hernandez v. S. I. C. Finance Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1968
- Branch v. . TomlinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Moyer v. International State Bank of International FallsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Household Finance Corp. v. EllisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
- In Re ZimmelUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 1995
- In Re LauesUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1988
- United Bank of Bismarck v. SellandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.