Pendergrast v. Home Mortgage Co.

189 S.E. 118, 211 N.C. 126, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 21
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 6, 1937·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It is admitted by the plaintiff on bis appeal to this Court, that the defendant Jefferson E. Owens was duly appointed substitute trustee in the deed of trust from the plaintiff to the First Rational Bank of Durham, and that the sale of the land conveyed by the deed of trust on 7 November, 1931, by the First Rational Bank of Durham, as Trustee, was regular in all respects.

The plaintiff contends, however, that the substitute trustee was without authority by reason of bis appointment to execute a deed to the purchaser at the sale made by the original trustee. This contention cannot be sustained.

*128 Under the provisions of the deed of trust which appear in the record, and under the provisions of the statute (chap. 78, Public Laws of N. C., 1931, N. C. Code of 1935, sec. 2583 [a]), the substitute trustee was authorized to complete the foreclosure of the deed of trust by the execution of a deed to the purchaser at the sale made by the original trustee, upon his compliance with his bid. See N. C. Mort. Corp. v. Morgan, 208 N. C., 743; 182 S. E., 450.

There is no error in the judgment.

Affirmed.

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

Pendergrast v. Home Mortgage Co., 189 S.E. 118, 211 N.C. 126, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 21 (N.C. 1937).

189 S.E. 118 (Pendergrast v. Home Mortgage Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pearce v. . Watkins
14 S.E.2d 653 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1941)