Legal Opinion

Jarrett v. . Holland

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 13, 1938PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

When a person acquires an interest in property pending an action of which be has notice, actual or presumed, in which tbe title to tbe land is in issue, from one of tbe parties to tbe action, be is bound by tbe judgment in tbe action just as tbe party from whom be bought would have been. Tbe rule is considered absolutely necessary to give effect to tbe judgments of courts, because if it were not so held a party could always defeat tbe judgment by conveying in anticipation of it to some stranger, and tbe plaintiff would be compelled to commence a new action against him. Rollins v. Henry, 78 N.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Rollins v. . HenrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
  2. Arrington v. . ArringtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
  3. Collingwood v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  4. Hickson Lumber Co. v. Gay Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  5. Womble v. . BattleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1844

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gilley v. ShoffnerDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2004
  2. Cutter v. CUTTER REALTY COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  3. Whitehurst v. AbbottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Parker v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  5. Northen v. Rezvani (In re McCormick)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2008

4 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