Peedin v. Oliver

Decision Date17 March 1943
Docket Number240.
Citation24 S.E.2d 519,222 N.C. 665
PartiesPEEDIN v. OLIVER et al.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

Civil action to set aside foreclosure sale and deed made pursuant thereto by defendant D.B. Oliver, as mortgagee, to defendant W.B. Oliver, Jr., as cloud upon title.

The uncontroverted facts are these:

1. Plaintiff, being in possession of a certain tract of land situated in Boon Hill and Pine Level Townships, Johnston County, North Carolina, containing 53 acres more or less, of which he was "the owner in fee" subject to the life estate of his mother, with the joinder of his wife, executed to defendant D.B. Oliver a mortgage deed dated 6 December, 1929, conveying therein the said land by specific description, as security for a certain indebtedness therein described, payable in ten equal annual installments with interest, "the first installment to be due one year from December 6, 1929", with power of sale in the event of default in payment of installments.

2. Plaintiff was unable to, and did not, pay any of the indebtedness due in the years 1930 to 1933, both inclusive or the taxes levied on the land in the years 1929 to 1933, both inclusive.

3. Defendant, D.B. Oliver, acting under the power of sale contained in the mortgage deed from plaintiff and his wife, and through his attorney, advertised the land, in the manner hereinafter shown, for sale at noon on Monday, 5 February, 1934, at the courthouse door in Smithfield, when and where the only bid submitted was $1,750, made in the name of W.B. Oliver, Jr., who is the son of D.B. Oliver, upon which bid the crier declared the land sold, and, pursuant thereto, and on 16 February, 1934, defendant D.B. Oliver, as mortgagee, executed and delivered to W.B. Oliver, Jr., a deed for said land, which deed is of record in office of register of deeds of Johnston County.

Plaintiff in his complaint alleges, and upon the trial below offered evidence tending to show substantially these pertinent facts:

(a) The notice of sale, as published in newspaper, is as follows: "Notice of Sale. By virtue of a mortgage deed dated December 6, 1929, by H.C. Peedin and wife, Addie May Peedin, recorded in Book 243, page 86, of the Johnston County Registry, default having been made in payment of the bond hereby secured, I will on Monday, February 5, 1934, at 12 M., at the Courthouse door in Smithfield, offer for sale at public auction for cash, that certain tract of land lying in Boone Hill and Pine Level Townships, Johnston County, North Carolina, adjoining S.A. Wellons and George Worley and others, and containing fifty three (53) acres, more or less, and fully described by metes and bounds in the aforesaid mortgage. This January 5, 1934. D.B. Oliver, Mortgagee. Ed F. Ward, Attorney".

(b) Plaintiff, his wife, and his sister and her husband, attended the sale on 5 February, 1934. Defendant D.B. Oliver and his attorney, Ed F. Ward, were present. W.B. Oliver, Jr., was not present. "Just prior to the sale", and while in front of the Courthouse preparing to make the sale, "defendant D.B. Oliver directed his attorney *** to bid his claim and make the deed to his son, W.B. Oliver, Jr.". After the attorney had read the notice of sale, he "made one bid", "and there was no other bid". No report of the sale was filed or recorded in the office of the clerk of Superior Court.

On the other hand, defendant, D.B. Oliver, and defendants, W.B. Oliver, Jr., and wife, in separate answers filed, deny the material allegations of the complaint, and assert that the foreclosure sale was regularly advertised and conducted and that W.B. Oliver, Jr., became the last and highest bidder, and that the sale to him is valid. Defendants further plead that the plaintiff, at the time, had full knowledge of all the facts and circumstances in connection with the foreclosure sale, and made no objection thereto, and by his conduct has since ratified the same, and is estopped to attack the validity of the foreclosure, and of the deed pursuant thereto. They further plead laches of plaintiff, and the three-year statute of limitation, C.S. § 441, in bar of plaintiff's right to recover in this action.

Plaintiff in reply denies the material averments in the further answers of the defendants.

Upon the trial below plaintiff offered in evidence: (1) Deed from B.I. Peedin and wife, Hepsie Peedin, father and mother of plaintiff, to plaintiff, dated 4 April, 1910, registered 4 May, 1910, for recited consideration of $1,000, in which the land in question is conveyed "in fee", and which "reserves and excepts the life estate of the said B.I. Peedin and Hepsie Peedin". (2) Quitclaim deed from Hepsie Peedin to W.B. Oliver, Jr., dated 5 January, 1934, and registered, for recited consideration of $100, therein describing the land as in the mortgage deed from plaintiff and wife to D.B. Oliver of date 6 December, 1929; (3) Summons in this action dated 8 November, 1941, and served 12 November, 1941.

And plaintiff, in his own behalf, further testified, in pertinent part, that on 6 December, 1929, and prior thereto he was in possession of the land described in the mortgage deed; that his mother had a life estate in said land; and that she did not sign the mortgage deed. Speaking directly, he testified: "I heard a conversation between Mr. Ward and Mr. Oliver. Mr. Oliver told Mr. Ward to bid off the land for what he had in it and to make the deed to 'B'. Mr. Ward read the description and cried a bid of $1750.00, and said 'Three times and sold'. No one else bid at the sale. I applied at the Federal Land Bank for a loan in 1934, but this application was made either after the sale or was made after the sale was advertised. Mr. Oliver told me not to make an application as he did not want the money. This loan was approved for $2175.00, which was enough to pay the mortgage. I did not get approval of the loan before the land was foreclosed by this sale. After the sale I continued to live on the land during the years 1934, 1935 and 1936. While I continued to live on the land some wood was cut, but all of it was used on that place". Then plaintiff named those who had cut wood, approximately thirty cords, "worth about $1.50 a cord", and, continuing, said: "No timber was cut by anyone except the stovewood. The only improvements made on the place while I was there was the painting of the house by Mr. Oliver at a cost of about $50.00, so far as I know. I left the land at the end of the year 1936. My mother's name was Hepsie Peedin. She died October 6, 1936. The rental value of the land from 1929 to 1932 was $400.00 to $500.00 a year. The rental value for 1932 was $600.00." And, continuing, plaintiff further testified that W.B. Oliver, Jr., the son of D.B. Oliver, was working in his father's store on 5 February, 1934, but that he did not know in what capacity, and that plaintiff "was told by 'B' that he was getting $126.00 a month and had been working in the store since he got through college".

On cross examination plaintiff continued by saying: " 'B' Oliver's grandfather was named W.B. Oliver, who used to own this business which is still known as 'W.B. Oliver & Son', and is now owned by D.B. Oliver. 'B' Oliver did not own any interest in the business at the time of this mortgage sale in 1934, so far as I know *** I applied for a Federal Land Bank loan in January, 1934, when I heard the land was going to be sold. I went to see Mr. Oliver and he told me he did not want the money. It was the land he wanted. I did not have time to get the money before the land was foreclosed *** I rented the land from D.B. Oliver in 1934 for $100.00. It is worth more, but that is all the rent he charged. I rented it from 'B' in 1935, on shares, and also in 1936. About August, 1936, 'B' rented the land to someone else. I left at the end of that year and moved to Wayne County and stayed two years, and then moved to near Clayton, in Johnston County. About two years ago I saw they had built a pack house and a small smoke house. When I attended the sale of the land I did not make any objection to the sale or raise any question about it, and never did make any protest to anyone or tell anyone that I had or claimed any interest in the land after the sale until the institution of this action. After I left the place in 1936, I was back at the place very often. My people lived there. At the time Mr. Oliver was making improvements on the land I did not make any protest to him or claim any interest in the land. I did not know I could then."

Mrs. Annie May Peedin, wife of plaintiff, testified in part, in corroboration of plaintiff as to what D.B. Oliver told his attorney at the sale with regard to bidding and making of deed to "B", and as to improvements made on the land while they "were there".

The clerk of Superior Court testified that there is no report or record made by D.B. Oliver of the foreclosing of the mortgage deed in question.

To judgment of nonsuit at the close of plaintiff's evidence, plaintiff excepted and appeals to the Supreme Court, and assigns error.

Parker & Lee and Wellons & Wellons, all of Smithfield, for plaintiff appellant.

G.A. Martin, of Smithfield, for defendants appellees.

WINBORNE Justice.

A careful consideration of the evidence shown in the record on this appeal, taken in the light most favorable to plaintiff fails to show error in the judgment of nonsuit entered in Superior Court. Plaintiff's challenge thereto is controlled by answer to three questions: First: Does the notice of foreclosure sufficiently describe the land to be sold? The answer is Yes. While the statute C.S. § 2588 provides that "in sales of real...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Hughes v. Oliver
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 7, 1948
    ... ... 54, 21 ... S.E.2d 900 ...           One ... guilty of laches has simply omitted 'to assert a right ... for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, under ... circumstances prejudicial to adverse party. ' Black's ... Law Dictionary, 3d Ed., p. 1062; Peedin v. Oliver, ... 222 N.C. 665, 24 S.E. 2d 519; Stell v. Trust Co., ... 223 N.C. 550, 27 S.E.2d 524; Hardy v. Mayo, 224 N.C ... 558, 31 S.E.2d 748 ...           Here ... the plaintiffs, with full knowledge of all the facts relative ... to the 70-acre tract of land, and knowing the ... ...
  • McNeill v. McNeill
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • May 19, 1943
    ...that there may be fraud, and gives an artificial effect to the relation beyond its natural tendency to produce belief. Peedin v. Oliver, 222 N.C. 665, 24 S.E.2d 519; Harris v. Hilliard, 221 N.C. 329, 20 S.E.2d This principle, it would seem, was applicable to the facts of the instant record,......
  • Graham v. Northwestern Bank
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • October 25, 1972
    ...would know and understand from the advertisement the exact property offered for sale.' To the same effect, see Peedin v. Oliver, 222 N.C. 665, 24 S.E.2d 519 (1943); Blount v. Basnight, 209 N.C. 268, 183 S.E. 405 In the case at bar, although two of the dates were incorrectly stated in the No......

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