Pendergrast v. Home Mortgage Co.
This text of 189 S.E. 118 (Pendergrast v. Home Mortgage Co.) 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.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
189 S.E. 118, 211 N.C. 126, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pendergrast-v-home-mortgage-co-nc-1937.