Foster v. Allison Corp.
Decision Date | 17 February 1926 |
Docket Number | 220. |
Citation | 131 S.E. 648,191 N.C. 166 |
Parties | FOSTER v. ALLISON CORPORATION ET AL. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Onslow County; Devin, Judge.
Action by Jesse C. Foster against the Allison Corporation and another. Judgment for plaintiff entered by default. From an order setting aside the judgment under C. S. § 492, rather than section 600, and affirming a judgment of the clerk setting aside the same judgment, defendants appeal. Affirmed. This was an action brought by plaintiff against defendant Allison Corporation to set aside certain conveyances of land in North Carolina, made by plaintiff to it for fraud. The Newton Trust Company, the other defendant, had mortgages on the lands given by the Allison Corporation, and it is alleged by plaintiff that the mortgages of defendant Newton Trust Company were taken with full knowledge, and that it was party to the fraud of the Allison Corporation.
The plaintiff prayed:
The defendants were foreign corporations. The plaintiff issued its summons against defendants and had it served by publication. On January 19, 1925, the clerk rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff, in accordance with prayer of the complaint.
The defendants, on March 31, 1925, through its counsel, by "special appearance," gave notice to plaintiff and his counsel that on Saturday, April 11, 1925, setting hour of day, a motion would be made before the clerk "to quash process and to set aside the judgment rendered herein as of the 19th day of January, A. D. 1925, under section 600 of the Consolidated Statutes, on the ground that the defendants were taken by surprise and were guilty of no neglect whatever in failing to defend the action because of the fact that the pendency of the action had not come to their attention directly or indirectly, until after the 19th day of January A. D. 1925." Accompanying this motion was a verified petition of defendants fully setting forth the grounds of its motion. The clerk found the facts, and among them:
Defendants tendered an order finding certain facts which the clerk refused to sign, and the counsel specially appearing appealed to the judge of the superior court from the judgment signed by the clerk. The matter having been heard, the judge made the following order:
"This cause coming on for a hearing upon appeal of the defendants, and being heard by his honor, W. A. Devin, judge, during April term, 1925, of the superior court of Onslow county, said appeal of the defendants having been taken upon the refusal of the clerk to find facts and sign order as contended for by the defendants under section 600 of the Consolidated Statutes ( ), and the court being of opinion that the motion of the defendants is controlled by section 492 of the Consolidated Statutes, hereby affirms the findings of fact and the order heretofore signed by the clerk, with the following modifications, viz.:
(1) That the following finding of fact be added to those found by the clerk in said former order and inserted after paragraph 10:
(2) That the defendants be given till August 1, 1925, within which time to file answer to the complaint heretofore filed in this cause or within which time to file such other pleadings as they may be advised.
The defendants, through counsel, requested the court to include, in the finding of fact above set out, the following: 'And the defendants were guilty of no laches or neglect in failing to file answer, but were, in fact, taken by surprise when they learned that the service of summons had been completed by publication and the clerk was about to sign the judgment,' which was declined by the court.
To the foregoing order affirming the former order of the clerk on the ground that section 600 does not apply, and the adjudging that relief can only be given the defendants under the terms of section 492 of Consolidated Statutes, the defendants except, assign error, and appeal to the Supreme Court."
Rountree & Carr, of Wilmington, and Nere E. Day, of Jacksonville, for appellants.
I. M. Bailey, of Raleigh, and John D. Warlick, of Jacksonville, for appellee.
The defendants contend:
This brings us to consider C. S. § 492 and C. S. § 600. Under C. S. art. 8, "Civil Procedure," the procedure of obtaining service on foreign corporations by publication, manner, etc., is fully set forth; then the manner of personal service on nonresidents; then C. S. § 492, which is as follows:
It will be noted that in C. S. § 492, is the following:
"Title to property sold under such judgment to a purchaser in good faith is not thereby affected."
Counsel for defendants earnestly contends that in setting aside a judgment under section 492, a bona fide purchaser may obtain title and property be taken without due process of law or a day in court, and argues that this would not be the case under C. S. § 600. The contention is not tenable as to due process. When defendant Allison Corporation acquired land in this state, and when the Newton Trust Company took a mortgage on the land, they took it with the law in force at the time in reference to foreign corporations.
It is said in 6 R. C. L. part § 445:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cable v. Cable
... ... constructive service by an order of publication has been had ... In Foster v. Allison Corp. et al., 191 N.C. 166, 131 ... S.E. 648, 44 A.L.R. 610, the plaintiff brought an ... ...
-
Hood ex rel. Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Stewart
... ... neglect, has no application on the present record. Foster ... v. Allison Corp., 191 N.C. 166, 131 S.E. 648, 44 A.L.R ... 610; Wellons v. Lassiter, 200 ... ...
-
Voehringer v. Pollock
... ... title by decree in the party entitled to the same. G.S. § ... 1-98, C.S. § 484; Foster v. Allison Corp., 191 N.C ... 166, 167, 131 S.E. 648, ... [30 S.E.2d 377.] ... 44 A.L.R. 610; ... ...
-
City of Washington v. Hodges
... ... The statute has no ... bearing on the facts here. See Foster v. Allison ... Corp., 191 N.C. 166, 131 S.E. 648, 44 A. L. R. 610 ... The ... ...