Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1890

Thornton v. Vanstory

Thornton v. Vanstory
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided September 15, 1890 · Avery
107 N.C. 331

Counsel

Mr. N. W. Ray, for plaintiff., Mr. T. H. Sutton, for defendant.

Thornton v. Vanstory

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Avery, J.

after stating the facts: Where a homestead has been allotted in the manner prescribed in chapter 10 of The Code, the time for filing objections has passed, and the return of the appraisers has been registered, as in this case, a second allotment- made by appraisal, in the manner prescribed in said chapter, at the instance of a judgment creditor, will be treated as void, though his judgment may have been rendered and docketed after the homestead was first laid off. In such a case, where the creditor files objections to the return of the appraisers so appointed at his instance! and offers proof tending to show that by the return the appraisers assigned to the “homesteader” land worth more than one thousand dollars, the Courts will not treat such objections filed as raising an issue as to the value, for the jury. Gulley v. Cole, 102 N. C, 333; ibid., 96 N. C., 447; Ray v. Thornton, 95 N. C., 571.

There was no error in the refusal of the Court below to submit the issue tendered to the jury, nor in the order setting aside the second allotment as void.

No error. Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.