Virginia-Carolina Laundry Supply Corp. v. Scott
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtLake, J.
The first question to be determined is whether the holder of the note which the deed of trust purports to secure is a necessary party to this action. In Hancock v. Wooten, 107 N.C. 9, 12 S.E. 199, certain creditors, in behalf of themselves and all other creditors of the grantor, attacked as a fraud upon creditors a deed of assignment to a trustee to secure payment of claims specified therein. One of the creditors so preferred died. The trustees contended that her representative was a necessary party to the action. Shepherd, J., later C.J., speaking for the Court, said:
“[W]e will consider the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Warren v. . MakelySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Hancock Bros. & Co. v. WootenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- McCanless v. . FlinchumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
- Hobbs v. CashwellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Brown v. . MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Nytco Leasing, Inc. v. Southeastern Motels, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- L & M GAS COMPANY v. LeggettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Wurlitzer Distributing Corp. v. SchofieldCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Gahagan v. GosnellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Camden County v. Northeastern Community Development Corp.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2017
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.