From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bechtel v. Weaver

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1932
164 S.E. 338 (N.C. 1932)

Opinion

(Filed 15 June, 1932.)

APPEAL by plaintiff and defendants from Harding, J., at September Term, 1931, of HAYWOOD.

Joseph W. Little for plaintiff.

Heazel, Shuford Hartshorn for defendants.


Civil action to declare foreclosure of deed of trust void.

Plaintiff brought an action to enjoin foreclosure under deed of trust. Failing in that suit, and while it was still pending, he brings this action to declare the foreclosure void.

The defendants filed a plea in abatement and interposed a demurrer on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The plea in abatement was overruled, and the demurrer was sustained. Both sides appeal.


If it be conceded that the defendants' plea in abatement should have been sustained ( Brown v. Polk, 201 N.C. 375, 160 S.E. 357), still the correct result has been reached in another way, and the judgment will not be disturbed. Bank v. McCullers, 201 N.C. 440; Rankin v. Oates, 183 N.C. 517, 112 S.E. 32. "A new trial will not be granted when the action of the trial judge, even if erroneous, could by no possibility injure the appellant." Butts v. Screws, 95 N.C. 215.

This disposition of the matter renders it unnecessary to consider defendants' appeal.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Bechtel v. Weaver

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1932
164 S.E. 338 (N.C. 1932)
Case details for

Bechtel v. Weaver

Case Details

Full title:JOHN A. BECHTEL v. D. J. WEAVER ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1932

Citations

164 S.E. 338 (N.C. 1932)
164 S.E. 338

Citing Cases

Munday v. Bank

Hence, the trial will not be disturbed. It is not after the manner of appellate courts to upset judgments…

Morroni v. Maitin

Once the rights to a foreclosure sale are fixed, a court cannot issue a prohibitory injunction, as "a court…