Legal Opinion

Barnaby v. Boardman

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 4, 1985No. 559PA84PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MITCHELL, Justice.

This case presents questions concerning the proper interpretation of the anti-deficiency statute, N.C.G.S. 45-21.38.1 The *566controlling question on appeal is whether the holder of a promissory note given by a buyer to a seller for the purchase of land and secured by a deed of trust embracing such land may release his security and then sue on the note. We conclude that any such note holder must look exclusively to the property conveyed in seeking to recover any balance owed. He may not sue on the note. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.

At the outset…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Stanback v. StanbackSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. Brown v. JensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Childers v. Parker's, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. State ex rel. Utilities Commission v. Lumbee River Electric Membership Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  5. Spangler v. MemelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Oberlin Capital, L.P. v. SlavinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  2. Wells Fargo Ins. Servs. United States, Inc. v. LinkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2019
  3. Mid Kansas Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Wichita v. Dynamic Development Corp.Arizona Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Matter of Foreclosure of Trust by GoforthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
  5. State Ex Rel. Long v. Petree Stockton, L.L.P.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998

45 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