Legal Opinion

Armour Fertilizer Works v. Newbern

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 29, 1936PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConnor, J.

On 6 January, 1932, supplemental proceedings in execution, as authorized by statute, C. S., 711, et seq., were instituted by the plaintiff in this action for the purpose of procuring an order of the court that the indebtedness of W. A. Brock to the defendant H. D. Newbern, then existing, if any, be applied as a payment on the judgment which the plaintiff had theretofore recovered against the defendant, and which had not been paid or satisfied. At that date an action which had been instituted in the Superior Court of Currituck County by the defendant H. D. Newbern against W. A. Brock was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. WinslowU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1843
  2. Godwin v. . BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  3. Chatham v. . Realty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1920

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Lipe v. Guilford National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Bank of Northampton v. Town of JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  3. Winborne v. . GuySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. In Re WallaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  5. Rickman v. . HolshouserSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

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