Legal Opinion

Orange County v. . Atkinson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 28, 1935PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClaRKSON, J.

From the agreed statement of facts and C. M. Cates’ verified motion, the record shows the following: “C. M. Cates has been duly made a party defendant for tbe purpose of making a motion to set aside tbe sale of tbe property on tbe grounds tbat tbe same is irregular, and should therefore be declared void.” From tbe view we take of this case, we think it immaterial on which day tbe sale was held. Tbe sale was void as to O. M. Cates. Tbe judgment in tbe court below recites tbat tbe decision was based on whether tbe sale was made on a proper day under tbe statutes, and held tbat it was. C. M.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dixon v. . OsborneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. Wilson v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Best v. . GarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  2. Page v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. Morgan v. . NorwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Town of Wendell v. ScarboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Morgan v. Town of NorwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

2 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