Lofton v. Lofton

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Lofton v. Lofton

322 S.E.2d 654, 71 N.C. App. 635, 1984 N.C. App. LEXIS 3912

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 4, 1984

DocketNo. 848DC258

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 322 S.E.2d 654 (Lofton v. Lofton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lofton v. Lofton, 322 S.E.2d 654, 71 N.C. App. 635, 1984 N.C. App. LEXIS 3912 (N.C. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

WELLS, Judge.

The Equitable Distribution Act specifically provides that where a divorce action and an application for equitable distribution are pending, “[t]he equitable distribution may not precede a decree of absolute divorce.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-21(a) (Supp. 1983). “Upon application of a party to an action for divorce, an equitable distribution of property shall follow a decree of absolute divorce.” Id. The record in this case does not contain any judgment of absolute divorce, nor any indication that such a judgment ever has been entered in North Carolina or elsewhere.

On the present record, the trial court’s dismissal of defendant’s equitable distribution claim was premature. The trial court lacked authority to consider or grant plaintiffs motions. The order appealed from is therefore

Vacated.

Judges Arnold and Becton concur.

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

WELLS, Judge.

The Equitable Distribution Act specifically provides that where a divorce action and an application for equitable distribution are pending, “[t]he equitable distribution may not precede a decree of absolute divorce.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-21(a) (Supp. 1983). “Upon application of a party to an action for divorce, an equitable distribution of property shall follow a decree of absolute divorce.” Id. The record in this case does not contain any judgment of absolute divorce, nor any indication that such a judgment ever has been entered in North Carolina or elsewhere.

On the present record, the trial court’s dismissal of defendant’s equitable distribution claim was premature. The trial court lacked authority to consider or grant plaintiffs motions. The order appealed from is therefore

Vacated.

Judges Arnold and Becton concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

322 S.E.2d 654, 71 N.C. App. 635, 1984 N.C. App. LEXIS 3912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lofton-v-lofton-ncctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack