Legal Opinion

Lalonde v. . Hubbard

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 15, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConnor, J.

In Wearer v. Hampton, 201 N. C., 798, 161 S. E., 480, it is said: “It is settled beyond controversy in this State that a consent judgment is tbe contract of tbe parties spread upon tbe records with tbe approval and sanction of a court of competent jurisdiction, and that such contract cannot be modified or vacated without tbe consent of tbe parties thereto, except for fraud or mistake, and that in order to vacate such judgment, an independent action must be instituted, Board of Education v. Commissioners, 192 N. C., 274, 134 S. E., 852, Morris v. Patterson, 180 N. C., 484, 105 S. E., 25.”

In…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Morris v. . PattersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  2. Weaver v. . HamptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Board of Education v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Hoell v. . WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Holden v. HoldenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Stanley v. CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. Herring v. Queen City Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  4. Webster v. . WebsterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Law v. . ClevelandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API