Legal Opinion

Skinner v. . Coward

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 2, 1929PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

It is important to note that the plaintiff seeks relief against all the respondents by a motion made before the clerk, presumably because the judgment recovered before a justice of the peace had been entered on the judgment docket of the Superior Court. The only parties to the judgment were N. R. Skinner as plaintiff and C. C. Coward as defendant. When the plaintiff made his motion he issued a notice to J. K. Worthington, and to Worthington’s two sons who had purchased the land at the foreclosure sale, to show cause why the land should not be sold to satisfy the judgment. This notice did not…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bobbitt v. . StantonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  2. Kornegay v. . SpicerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
  3. Vick v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  4. Norman v. Hallsey.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  5. Barrett v. . BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Staunton Military Academy, Inc. v. DockerySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Horne-Wilson, Inc. v. . Wiggins Bros., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  3. Southern Athletic/Bike v. House of Sports, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  4. Ridley v. JIM WALTER CORPORATIONSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  5. Sheets v. . Stradford.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API