Smith v. . Smith .

72 N.C. 228
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 5, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 72 N.C. 228 (Smith v. . Smith .) 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
Smith v. . Smith ., 72 N.C. 228 (N.C. 1875).

Opinion

Pearson, C. J.

This case is governed by the law, as it was declared to be, before the adoption of the C. C. P. So the question as to how far the title of a purchaser of land at a sheriff’s sale, may be effected by a fair docketed judgment, is not presented. Before the adoption of the 0. 0. P., no rule of law was more clearly settled than the rule, that a purchaser at *231 a sheriff’s sale (the judgment and execution being regular) acquired tke title of the defendant in the execution. Any contest among the judgment creditors, who claimed priority of lieu, effected merely the fund raised by the sheriff’s sale, and left the purchaser secure in his title. 1 will not take the trouble to make a “ rehash ” of the settled principles upon this subject, but will content myself by making a reference to the well digested brief of the plaintiff’s counsel, filed in the case, wherein he gives references to all of the cases upon the subject ; and will leave the subject as to how for the law has been changed by the C. 0. E., in respect to the title acquired by the purchaser under the first sale, made by authority of judicial process to be settled! when the point is presented by the facts of the case.

There is no error.

Pee Cükiam. Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Threadgill v. . Redwine
2 S.E. 526 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1887)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 N.C. 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-smith-nc-1875.