Moore v. Jordan
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a special proceeding brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants for the sale of certain lands for partition. The plaintiffs, J. W. Moore and others, and the defendants, W. B. Jordan and others, were heirs-at-law of Samuel E. Westray, who died domiciled in the county of Nash, on the 15th day of February, 1894. He was at the time of his death seized and possessed of lairds lying in Edgecombe and Nash counties.
Read the full summary
This was a special proceeding brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants for the sale of certain lands for partition. The plaintiffs, J. W. Moore and others, and the defendants, W. B. Jordan and others, were heirs-at-law of Samuel E. Westray, who died domiciled in the county of Nash, on the 15th day of February, 1894. He was at the time of his death seized and possessed of lairds lying in Edgecombe and Nash counties. William S. Battle, one of theheirs-at-law of S. E. Westray, was indebted to various parties who had obtained judgment against him and had caused the same to be docketed in…
1DissentClark, J.
The distinction must be clearly kept in mind between the lien, which is the right accruing *92as between the judgment creditor and debtor, to subject the property, and the priority in the application of the proceeds of a sale under execution, which is the apportionment of the rights of judgment creditors among themselves.
The manner of acquiring the lien as to real estate has been changed by statute. The apportionment of the proceeds of sale according to priority has never been affected by statute and, as the courts possess no legislative power, the law as to priorities among execution and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sawyers v. . SawyersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Kollock v. JacksonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
- State Ex Rel. Titman v. RhyneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883