Atkinson-Clark Canal Co., In re, ATKINSON-CLARK

Decision Date31 October 1951
Docket NumberNo. 315,ATKINSON-CLARK,315
Citation67 S.E.2d 276,234 N.C. 374
PartiesIn reCANAL CO.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

William H. Watson and Frank M. Wooten, Jr., Greenville, for appellant.

Sam B. Underwood, Jr., Greenville, for appellees.

DENNY, Justice.

After stating the facts as above: The appellant contends that its petition to the Clerk of the Superior Court to have its assessments docketed as a lien upon the lands of the respective respondents was based on the law as set out in the first paragraph of G.S. § 156-43, unaffected by the amendments thereto enacted by Chapter 180, Public Laws of 1939. Therefore, it argues and contends that there was nothing for the Clerk to pass upon, and that it was the duty of the Clerk to docket the assessments and if the respondents were dissatisfied therewith, they had the right to appeal and have the matter heard by a jury. This contention runs counter to the allegations of the petition and the prayer for relief contained therein.

It appears from the petition that the petitioner requested the Clerk of the Superior Court to pass upon and approve its acts and to declare the assessments due as shown on the Certificate of Assessment attached thereto. And it further appears from the record that the Clerk passed upon the petition as requested but declined to approve the assessments and entered judgment to that effect. Consequently, we deem it unnecessary to consider or discuss whether the procedure adopted by the petitioner was based on the law as amended in 1939, or that portion thereof which was in effect prior thereto, or both. For the question before us is not one on the merits of the cause, but on the single question as to whether the Clerk's judgment entered on February, 28 1950, is res judicata as to the matters alleged in the petition. Durham Consol. Land & Improvement Co. v. Guthrie, 123 N.C. 185, 31 S.E. 601.

A judgment entered by a clerk of the Superior Court in a special proceeding in which such clerk has jurisdiction, will stand as a judgment of the court, if not excepted to and reversed or modified on appeal, as allowed by statute. Brittain v. Mull, 91 N.C. 498; Gold v. Maxwell, 172 N.C. 149, 90 S.E. 115; Southern State Bank v. Leverette, 187 N.C. 743, 123 S.E. 68. See also concurring opinion in Ex parte Wilson, 222 N.C. 99, at page 104, 22 S.E.2d 262.

Conceding, but not deciding, that the Clerk's decision was erroneous, when the petitioner undertook to appeal therefrom and the appeal was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Wiggins v. Planet Home Lending, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • June 26, 2015
    ...See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 45-21.16(d). A clerk's judgment "will stand as [the] judgment of the court." In re Atkinson-Clark Canal Co., 234 N.C. 374, 377, 67 S.E.2d 276, 278 (1951). Any issue that the clerk decides in a foreclosure proceeding pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 45-21.16(d) is conclusi......
  • Hardin v. Bank of Am., N.A.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • January 3, 2017
    ...is conclusive unless appealed and reversed and cannot be relitigated in a subsequent lawsuit. See In re Atkinson-Clark Canal Co., 234 N.C. 374, 377, 67 S.E.2d 276, 278 (1951); Haughton v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 737 S.E.2d 191, 2013 WL 432575, at *3 (N.C. Ct. App. 2013) (unpublished table deci......
  • Newton v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • May 26, 2015
    ...See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 45-21.16(d). A clerk's judgment "will stand as [the] judgment of the court." In re Atkinson-Clark Canal Co., 234 N.C. 374, 377, 67 S.E.2d 276, 278 (1951). Any issue that the clerk decides in a foreclosure proceeding pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 45-21.16(d) is conclusi......
  • In re Thompson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • February 4, 2014
    ...After entry, a clerk's order that is not timely appealed “will stand as a judgment of the court[.]” In re Atkinson–Clark Canal Co., 234 N.C. 374, 377, 67 S.E.2d 276, 278 (1951). This legal proposition stems from the law of the case doctrine, which provides that “when a party fails to appeal......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT