Hales v. . Land Exchange

14 S.E.2d 667, 219 N.C. 651, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 122
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 21, 1941
StatusPublished

This text of 14 S.E.2d 667 (Hales v. . Land Exchange) 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
Hales v. . Land Exchange, 14 S.E.2d 667, 219 N.C. 651, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 122 (N.C. 1941).

Opinion

Civil action for recovery on notes secured by mortgage deed and for foreclosure of mortgage under power of sale therein contained.

At May Term, 1939, a consent judgment was entered in favor of plaintiffs against defendant for the amount of indebtedness alleged in the complaint, to the payment of which certain lands described in the judgment were condemned to be sold on Monday, 11 December, 1939, at public auction for cash under the direction of the court, and in which two commissioners were appointed to so sell the land, and in which the cause was remanded to clerk of Superior Court for further orders. Pending advertisement the sale was enjoined, and later the injunction was dissolved. Thereupon, at November Special Term, 1940, the presiding judge entered a judgment, ordering that the lands be sold on Monday, 30 December, 1940, at public auction for cash, and appointing one of the two commissioners named in the consent judgment to make the sale after advertising notice thereof as therein set forth.

In other respects this judgment is in conformity with the consent judgment. The cause is retained for further orders.

Defendant appealed therefrom to Supreme Court and assigns error. The consent judgment, in so far as it pertained to the sale of the land, was an interlocutory order in the cause, and has validity because of the approval of the judge, and was subject to modification by *Page 652 the judge like any other such order, provided it did not infringe upon the rights of the parties. See Fowler v. Winders, 185 N.C. 105,116 S.E. 177. Compare Coburn v. Comrs., 191 N.C. 68, 131 S.E. 372.

No encroachment upon rights of parties appears. Hence, the judgment will be

Affirmed.

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

Related

Fowler v. . Winders
116 S.E. 177 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1923)
Coburn v. Board of County Commissioners
131 S.E. 372 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1926)
Fowler v. Winders
185 N.C. 105 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 S.E.2d 667, 219 N.C. 651, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hales-v-land-exchange-nc-1941.