Cannon v. . Parker

81 N.C. 320
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 5, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 81 N.C. 320 (Cannon v. . Parker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cannon v. . Parker, 81 N.C. 320 (N.C. 1879).

Opinion

Smith, C. J.

The judgment of a justice of the peace may be docketed in the office of the superior court clerk of the county wherein it is rendered, and then become a “judgment of the superior court in all respects.” Execution thereon shall issue “to the sheriff of the county and shall have the same effect and be executed in the same manner as other executions of the superior court.” C. C. P., § 503.

It is, however," a judgment, when thus docketed in the superior court, only for the purpose of creating a lien on the debtor’s real property in the county and enforcing satisfaction by final process. It cannot be impeached, set aside^or modified by proceedings before the superior court, except by writ of recordari removing the cause to a higher jurisdiction. Ledbetter v. Osborne, 66 N. C., 379; Birdsey v. Harris, 68 N. C., 92. The lien extends to the real property which the debtor then has in the county, and such as he may thereafter acquire for the period of ten years from the time of docketing. C. C. P., § 254; Murchison v. Williams, 71 N. C., 135, and other cases preceding.

The effect of a sale under a junior judgment is to pass the debtor’s estate encumbered with the lien of an older judgment: and of a sale under both, (as we understand this to be) to vest the title in the purchaser and transfer the liens in the same order of priority to the proceeds of the sale. Sharpe v. Williams, 76 N. C., 87. The sheriff must observe these priorities, of which he has notice upon the face of the executions, in paying out the money to the respective creditors. The times of issuing and levying the executions are wholly immaterial. The administrators of Andrew Cope *323 are therefore entitled to be "first paid out of the.fund, and the plaintiff out of any residue which may remain. There is no error and the judgment must be affirmed.

No error. Affirmed.

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

Related

Dunham v. Anders.
38 S.E. 832 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1901)
Gammon v. . Johnson
35 S.E. 185 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1900)
Bernhardt v. . Brown
24 S.E. 527 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1896)
Dysart v. . Brandreth
23 S.E. 966 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1896)
Wilson Cotton Mills v. Randleman Cotton Mills
21 S.E. 431 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895)
G A. Gambrill Manufacturing Co. v. Wilcox
15 S.E. 885 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)
Meyers v. . Rice
12 S.E. 66 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1890)
Woodard v. . Paxton
7 S.E. 469 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1888)
Hinson v. . Adrian
86 N.C. 61 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 N.C. 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannon-v-parker-nc-1879.