Legal Opinion

Pulliam v. Thrash

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 20, 1957No. 99PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

The arguments presented deal largely with whether the court’s finding that Polansky is “in the position of a bona fide purchaser for value without notice more than two years after the death of Mrs. Dorsett,” is supported by evidence; and if so, whether Polansky is protected by the provisions of G.S. 28-83. In our view, other factors control decision.

We are not concerned with whether, as between the State of North Carolina and Polansky, the additional inheritance tax assessment was a lien on his interest in the Buncombe County lands until paid. G.S. 105-20, G.S. 105-31. The tax has been paid.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bailey v. . McLainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  2. Cochran's Ex'or and Trustee v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Emanuelson v. SullivanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
  2. In Re the Estate of RendslandWashington Supreme Court · 1979
  3. MATTER OF ESTATE OF McCOYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  4. State v. Seattle-First National BankWashington Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Greene v. LynchCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981

3 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