Legal Opinion

Johnson v. . Sink

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 8, 1940PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, O. J.

It is the position of the defendant that the commissioner’s deed under which plaintiff claims title to the locus in quo is void for the reason that the sale, of the premises was had without first allotting to the defendant his homestead. Fulton v. Roberts, 113 N. C., 421, 18 S. E., 510; Morrison v. Watson, 101 N. C., 332, 7 S. E., 795; McCanless v. Flinchum, 98 N. C., 358, 4 S. E., 359. The first and only reference to homestead appearing on the record is in the cross-examination of the plaintiff: “Q. Mr. Sink didn’t have any homestead allowed to him in this judgment of John A.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Mobley v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  2. Cameron v. . McDonaldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  3. McCanless v. . FlinchumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  4. Fulton v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  5. Cumming v. . BloodworthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Henderson County v. OsteenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. McKay v. . BullardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. Wadsworth v. WadsworthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API