Legal Opinion
McLean v. . Caldwell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided November 12, 1919PublishedCited by 8 opinions
OontRoveRsy without action, heard before Calvert, J., at September Term, 1919, of Robeson. The controversy is to determine the right to enforce collection of a bid for real estate, sold for reinvestment under section 1590 of Revisal. There was judgment that the title offered was a good one, and that the defendant, the purchaser at judicial sale, comply with his bid. Defendant excepted, and appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHoKE, J.
The facts pertinent to the inquiry and showing the action of the Superior Court thereon are very satisfactorily stated in the appellant’s brief filed in the cause, and are as follows:
“Fannie Peterson, owner in fee simple of a lot in the business portion of lumberton, died leaving a will wherein she devised said lot to Eugene Bond for life, with- remainder in fee to his oldest daughter, if any, or if no daughter, then to his oldest son, or should he die without issue, then to Allen Bond in'fee simple. In said will she also directed her executors to purchase another lot, adjoining the lot then…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pendleton v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Thompson v. RospigliosiSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
3Cited by8 opinions
- Beam v. . GilkeySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- Neill Ex Rel. Neill v. BachSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Poole & Blue, Inc. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Bond v. . BondSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Midyette v. Lycoming Timber & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.