McInturff v. . Gahagan
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBrogden, J.
The will of S. S. Shelton was construed by the Chancery Court of Greenville, Tennessee, in an action entitled, Mary Hampton, Executrix, v. Margaret Bell Shelton et al. The judgment in that decree provided: “But in case of the W. C. Cook note, he will be allowed the preference to keep the amount, on condition he keeps it properly secured.” It is contended that this is rels adjudicaba. It does not appear from the record that either the defendant, Cook, or the defendant, Gahagan, or his executors were parties to that suit. No document appears in the record except the judgment and it is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Exum v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Piner v. . BrittainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Hardison v. . EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Roberson-Ruffin Co. v. SpainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Scott v. . FisherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
3Cited by4 opinions
- Corporation Commission v. . WilkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Wrenn v. Lawrence Cotton Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Fidelity Bank v. HesseeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Helton v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938