Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

68 N.C. 183

Williams v. . Green

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 5, 1873

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1873-01-05

Motion, to set aside a former judgment of condemnation heard by Cannon, J., at the Fall Term, 1871, of the Superior Court for Cherokee county. The original was a proceeding supplemental to execution, instituted by the defendant in this action to condemn to his «se a certain debt, owing by one Blackwell, as is alleged, to ■S. E. Williams, against whom the defendant had a judgment. The debt owing by Blackwell was claimed by the ■plaintiff, the wife of Williams.

Decided 1873-01-05

*185 Settle, J.

¶1 It appeals that Ann .Williams, who seeks to be heard in this proceeding, became seized and possessed of a parcel of land in Cherokee county in 1855.

¶2 In 1862 she intermarried with the defendant, S. E. Williams, and in 1869 she with her husband, contracted to sell the said lands to one Blackwell, he giving bonds for the payment of the purchase money, and they giving bonds to make title when the purchase money should be paid. The said Williams and wife then removed to the State of Tennessee, and one Greene, the plaintiff in the action, to which this proceeding is supplemental, having theretofore recovered a judgment against the said S. E. Williams, procured an order from the Court directing Blackwell to appear and and answer what he owed the defendant, S. E. Williams. Blackwell answered that he owed the said S. E. Williams about $200, being the balance due on the purchase of the said lands; and thereupon the Court ordered Blackwell to pay the judgment in favor of Greene. The said Ann Williams makes affidavit that all of these proceedings occurred while she and her husband were absent from the State, and that she knew nothing of the same until some time thereafter.

¶3 There was error, in the order directing Blackwell to pay money, due in equity to the wife, in discharge of a debt of her husband.

¶4 The fact that she permitted the bonds from Blackwell to •be given to her husband alone, does not effect the equity which she had in that fund.

¶5 No determination of any controversy in relation to that fund could be had without the presence of the wife, and when she applied to be made a party and to have the order of the Court directing Blackwell to pay her money to the plaintiff set aside, the Court again erred in refusing her motion. As she sought relief from an illegal order made in *186 that cause, she was entitled to be l^eard on motion in the same cause. %

¶6 The injustice of the order is still more apparent, when we consider its effect upon Blackwell. He simply has a bond •for title, and of course the wife will never join in a deed until she receives full payment for her land, and no Court will ■compel her to do so.

¶7 Let it be certified that there is error.

Per Curiam.

¶8 Judgment reversed.

/68/nc/183 · .json · Public domain