Legal Opinion

Rea v. Universal CIT Credit Corporation

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 19, 1962No. 30PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodmaN, J.

Does the evidence suffice to warrant a finding that defendant wrongfully took possession of the automobile? If not, the court erred in submitting the first issue to the jury.

Until modified by statute, G.S. 45-3.1, a mortgagee of chattels or his assignee was, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, entitled to possession of the mortgaged property even prior to a default. Grier v. Weldon, 205 N.C. 575, 172 S.E. 200.

After default a mortgagee is entitled to possession of the mortgaged property and he may exercise that right without process of law provided he does so peacefully. Freeman v.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Willis v. WhittleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1909
  2. Freeman v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. Grier v. . WeldonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Eley v. Mid/East Acceptance Corp. of N.C., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  2. Wall v. Colvard, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  3. Raffa v. Dania BankDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
  4. Evans v. Star GMC Sales and Service, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  5. Marine Midland Bank-Central v. CoteDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977

2 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