Legal Opinion

York v. York

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 20, 1967No. 120PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The respondents attacked the validity of the sale of the lands for three reasons: first, that they received no notice of the pendency of the action or the sale of the lands; second, that the alleged certificate of Mrs. Turnbull was not in the files, and the orders of the clerk and the judge adding them and correcting the record was error; and, third, that notice of the proceedings was not mailed by the clerk as required by G.S. 1-99.2, and specifically that he did not comply with subsection (c) which requires “The clerk shall mail a copy of the notice of service of process by publication J?

We…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Standard Trust Co. of New York v. Commercial National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  2. State v. CannonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  3. Holloman v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  4. First National Bank of Graham v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  5. Model Mill Co. v. WebbSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. HammondSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. Willis v. J. M. Davis Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  3. State v. BeltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  4. State v. FerrerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  5. Hsg, LLC v. Edge-Works Manuf. Co.North Carolina Business Court · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API