Bigley v. Lombardo

EAGLES, Judge.

The sole issue here is whether the trial court erred in holding that the anti-deficiency statute does not apply to this case. Defendant argues that the trial court’s ruling implicitly allows a buyer of real property to waive the broad protections afforded him under G.S. 45-21.38. We disagree and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

At the outset we note that defendant has expressly abandoned his exceptions to the trial court’s findings of fact. There is competent evidence to support the court’s findings and, therefore, those findings are binding in our review of the case.…