Legal Opinion

Everett v. . Reynolds

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1894PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

It is well settled that the judgment of the court confirming the sale was irregular and not void (Lynn v. Lowe, 88 N.C. 478; Knott v. Taylor,99 N.C. 511; Wood v. Watson, 107 N.C. 52), and it has also been decided that a motion in the cause is the proper remedy to have such a judgment vacated although it be final. Carter v. Rountree, 109 N.C. 29; McLaurinv. McLaurin, 106 N.C. 331; and the cases cited.

Conceding that the purchaser, a stranger, is affected with the irregularity because the record would have disclosed a want of notice of the motion to confirm, we are nevertheless of the opinion…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Carter v. . RountreeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  2. Williamson v. . HartmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  3. Stancill and Gay v. . GaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  4. Peoples v. . NorwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  5. McLaurin v. . McLaurinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Harris v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  2. Grieve v. HuberWyoming Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Harris v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  4. Harris v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API