Legal Opinion

Foust v. Gate City Savings & Loan Ass'n

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 13, 1950No. 679PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaeNhill, J.

The material facts are not controverted. The property, having a market value of from $5,500 to $6,000, was actually sold for $825. The trustee erroneously reported that it was bid in for the sum of $6,400. His report to that effect was on record in the clerk’s office from the day of sale until the confirmation of the sale. Anyone seeking information concerning the sale would have ascertained that the property sold for more than its reasonable market value.

These facts raise the single question of law: Was the irregularity in the report of such substantial nature as to require the Court to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. MacClure v. Accident & Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. Worthy v. . CaddellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
  3. Peterson v. JohnsonWyoming Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Weir v. . WeirSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  5. Williams v. Philadelphia Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Turner v. BlackburnDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1975
  2. Swindell v. OvertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  3. CERTAIN-TEED PRODUCTS CORPORATION v. SandersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  4. Oakwood Acceptance Corp., LLC v. MassengillCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  5. Swindell v. OvertonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

14 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