Alexander v. . Thompson

189 S.E. 117, 211 N.C. 124, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 20
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 6, 1937·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

At the hearing of this matter, the court found that at January Term, 1936, of the Superior Court of Durham County, in an action entitled “W. J. Alexander and his wife, Annye U. Alexander, v. Will Ed Thompson, Victor S. Bryant, Trustee, H. V. Ray, Mrs. Elizabeth J. Umstead, J. IT. Umstead, Jr., and Margaret Umstead,” in which the title to the land described in the complaint in the action was involved, a judgment was rendered by consent of all the parties to said action. In said judgment there is a recital to the effect that neither Mrs. Elizabeth J. Umstead nor J. H. Umstead, Jr., nor Margaret Umstead has any interest in or title to the land described in the complaint, except as tenants by sufferance of the plaintiff, Annye U. Alexander.

By reason of this finding of fact, there was no error in the judgment and order that a writ of assistance be issued in this action. In Bohannon v. Trust Company, 207 N. C., 163, 176 S. E., 268, it is said: “That one who buys at a judicial sale is entitled to a writ of assistance is not questioned. Bank v. Leverette, 187 N. C., 743, 123 S. E., 68; Knight v. Houghtalling, 94 N. C., 408.” On the facts found by the court in the instant case, the petitioner was entitled to the writ as prayed for by him.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alexander v. . Thompson, 189 S.E. 117, 211 N.C. 124, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 20 (N.C. 1937).

189 S.E. 117 (Alexander v. . Thompson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Robertson v. Robertson
116 S.E.2d 849 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)