Stilly v. . Rice
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a petition to set aside a sal® of land hoard before Moore, J., at Fall Term-, 1871, of Pitt Superior Court. The following statement was signed by the presiding Judge r “ This cause coming on for further direction upon the complaint, answer and proofs, the Court proceeded to hear tho cause, and after argument finds the facts to be : That the testator of the defendant Myer Eice died seized of two separate tracts of land which, he directed in his last will and…
Read the full summary
This was a petition to set aside a sal® of land hoard before Moore, J., at Fall Term-, 1871, of Pitt Superior Court. The following statement was signed by the presiding Judge r “ This cause coming on for further direction upon the complaint, answer and proofs, the Court proceeded to hear tho cause, and after argument finds the facts to be : That the testator of the defendant Myer Eice died seized of two separate tracts of land which, he directed in his last will and testament to be sold by said executor, Myer Eice: that said executor exposed to sale both tracts together, in consequence of…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, C. J.
There is no error in the order made in the Court below, of which the defendant can complain ; the facts found establish that the executor either directly or indirectly attempted to buy property at his own sale. Such dealings have always met with the disapprobation of the Courts, and are, as of course, set aside at the instance of the parties interested in the fund.
The only exception to the ruling of his Honor that the learned counsel in this Court could suggest, was that the wife of the executor having bid in the property, was a necessary party. This exception is not tenable. The wife could…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Froneberger v. . LewisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- Pearson v. . PearsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Cole v. . StokesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893