Burleson v. Burleson

Decision Date27 March 1940
Docket NumberNo. 239.,239.
Citation217 N.C. 336,7 S.E.2d 706
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesBURLESON et al v. BURLESON et al.

Appeal from Superior Court, Mitchell County; Frank M. Armstrong, Judge.

Action to remove cloud from title to realty and for other relief by Stokes Burleson and others against Connie Burleson and others. A written demurrer to the complaint was overruled and judgment entered accordingly, and W. G. Vance and the Northwestern Bank appeal.

Reversed.

Civil action to remove cloud from title to real property; to have certain instruments purporting to be deeds declared null and void; and to recover possession of certain lands from the defendants.

The defendants W. G. Vance and The Northwestern Bank, in apt time, filed their written demurrer to the complaint on the grounds that there is a misjoinder of causes of action and a misjoinder of parties defendant.

Upon the hearing upon the demurrer the court overruled the same and entered judgment accordingly. The said defendants excepted and appealed.

W. C. Berry and Geo. L. Greene, both of Bakersville, and McBee & McBee, of Spruce Pine, for appellants.

Huskins & Wilson, of Burnsville, for appellees.

BARNHILL, Justice.

The plaintiffs are the heirs at law of Sherman Burleson, deceased, and as such are the owners as tenants in common of all lands of which he died seized and possessed. In the complaint the plaintiffs describe five separate tracts of land, four of which are located in Cane Creek Township and one in Grassy Creek Township, Mitchell County, and allege that they, as the heirsat law of Sherman Burleson, are the owners thereof.

The lands involved in the controversy between the defendant bank and plaintiff are located in Cane Creek Township. The lands involved in controversy between the plaintiffs and Jefferson Ward are likewise in said township and the lands in controversy between the plaintiffs and W. G. Vance are in Grassy Creek Township.

It is alleged in the complaint that the first, second, third and fifth tracts therein described were conveyed by Sherman Burleson by mortgage to the Merchants & Farmers Bank. The date of the mortgage is not disclosed. It is further alleged that on March 8, 1934, there was a foreclosure sale under the terms of the mortgage and foreclosure deed was executed to John C. McBee, Jr., September 7, 1934; that the exercise of the power of sale occurred more than ten years after the maturity of the indebtedness and at a time when the power of sale was barred by the statute of limitations; that McBee purchased as agent of and for the mortgagee; that no consideration was paid; that he, at the request of the mortgagee, his principal, executed a quitclaim deed to the defendant Connie Burleson. It is further alleged that one George L. Green, acting for Merchants & Farmers Bank, procured Connie Burleson to execute a deed in trust on that property (presumably omitting the fifth tract) in behalf of Merchants & Farmers Bank; that thereafter Green, trustee, executed the power of sale and delivered a foreclosure deed to the Merchants & Farmers Bank; that all of said transactions constituted a maneuver on the part of Farmers & Merchants Bank, mortgagee, to purchase at its own sale and the said bank acquired no title thereto, and its successor, the defendant Northwestern Bank, which by consolidation has succeeded to all the rights, duties and liabilities of the Merchants & Farmers Bank, is not the owner thereof.

As to the fifth tract, plaintiffs allege that Connie Burleson, subsequent to receiving the foreclosure deed from McBee, trustee, undertook to convey said tract to W. G. Vance who has entered into...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Casey v. Grantham
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • January 15, 1954
    ...Bank v. Angelo, 193 N.C. 576, 137 S.E. 705; Mills v. North Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank, 208 N.C. 674, 182 S.E. 336; Burleson v. Burleson, 217 N.C. 336, 7 S.E.2d 706. Thus, when a complete determination of one cause of action united with another requires the joinder of parties not necessa......
  • Fleming v. Carolina Power & Light Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 3, 1948
    ... ... Fisher litigate their differences in his suit. Montgomery v ... Blades, [supra] and cases cited. Wingler v. Miller, ... [supra]; Burleson v. Burleson, 217 N.C. 336, 7 S.E.2d ... 706; Beam v. Wright, [supra].' And, again, 'The cross ... action by defendant against a codefendant or a ... ...
  • Schnepp v. Richardson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 4, 1942
    ... ... suit. Montgomery v. Blades, 217 N.C. 654, 9 S.E.2d ... 397, and cases cited; Wingler v. Miller, 221 N.C ... 137, 19 S.E.2d 247; Burleson v. Burleson, 217 N.C ... 336, 7 S.E.2d 706; Beam v. Wright, 222 N.C. 174, 22 ... S.E.2d 270 ...           The ... cross action by a ... ...
  • Moore County v. Burns
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 29, 1944
    ... ... Miller, 221 N.C. 137, 19 ... S.E.2d 247; Frederick v. Southern Fidelity Mut. Ins ... Co., 221 N.C. 409, 20 S.E.2d 372; Burleson v ... Burleson, 217 N.C. 336, 7 S.E.2d 706; Vollers Co. v ... Todd, 212 N.C. 677, 194 S.E. 84; Smith v. Greensboro ... Joint Stock Land Bank, ... ...
  • 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