Legal Opinion · Dissent

Banks v. Lane

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 10, 1916Published

1DissentAlleN, J.

I agreed to tbe former opinion because I understood from tbe oral argument it was conceded tbat process bad been served in tbe drainage proceeding on Pate, tbe mortgagor in possession; but I find on tbe rebearing not only tbat it was not intended to make such an admission, but also that tbis is not tbe fact, and while disposed to sustain proceedings for tbe drainage of swamp lands, which tend to improve tbe public health and add to tbe wealth of tbe State, I cannot give my assent to tbe doctrine tbat a court of equity is without power to restrain tbe sale of land under a judicial proceeding…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Parker v. . BledsoeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
  2. Bowman v. . WardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API