Legal Opinion

County of Buncombe v. Penland

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 21, 1934PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClaRksoN, J.

The question involved: Where land is sold in an action to foreclose certificate of tax sale under N. 0. Code, 1931 (Michie) section 8031, and the owners are not named as parties defendant, but appear specially, does the court have the power and authority to hear and determine their motion to set aside and vacate the proceedings, on the ground that the same is void for want of jurisdiction and make additional party? We think so under the facts and circumstances of this case, as the appearance was general and the motion could be made. This action is brought to foreclose a certificate of tax…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. Lloyd Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  2. Fowler v. FowlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  3. Henry J. Heryey & Co. v. EdmundsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
  4. Gilbert v. HallIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Scott v. Life Ass'nSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Denton v. . VassiliadesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  2. McDowell v. . JusticeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API