Warren v. . Bourne

144 S.E. 541, 196 N.C. 803, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 405
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 3, 1928·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The court below’ rendered the following order: “This cause coming on to be heard and being heard before the undersigned judge upon the complaint, answer and other affidavits, it is considered by the court and it is, therefore, ordered and adjudged, and the court *804 finds as a fact that a serious controversy exists that the restraining order heretofore issued be, and the same hereby is continued until the final hearing upon the plaintiffs giving a bond in the sum of $500 to be conditioned according to law and approved by the clerk of the Superior Court of Pitt County. By consent, it is adjudged that the plaintiffs be and they hereby are restrained from encumbering the property described in the deed of trust mentioned in the complaint by mortgage, deed of trust or otherwise pending the final determination of this cause.”

In the record, as to material facts, there is serious conflict. We see no reason to disturb the order. Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153; Herwitz v. Sand Co., 189 N. C., 1; Wentz v. Land Co., 193 N. C., 32; Brown v. Aydlett, 193 N. C., 832; R. R. v. Rapid Transit Co., 195 N. C., 305.

Affirmed.

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

Warren v. . Bourne, 144 S.E. 541, 196 N.C. 803, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 405 (N.C. 1928).

144 S.E. 541 (Warren v. . Bourne) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cobb v. Clegg.
49 S.E. 80 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)
Hurwitz v. Carolina Sand & Gravel Co.
126 S.E. 171 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)
Norfolk Southern Railroad v. Rapid Transit Co.
141 S.E. 882 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1928)
Wentz v. Piedmont Land Co.
135 S.E. 480 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)
Brown v. Aydlett
193 N.C. 832 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)