Case ID: nc_214/html/0030-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Ctjexam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ORANGE COUNTY BUILDING & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. SOUTHGATE JONES and Wife, NANCY G. JONES.
    (Filed 15 June, 1938.)
    Constitutional Law § 22: Limitation of Actions § 1: Mortgages § 36—
    Ch. 529, Public Laws of 1933, providing a one-year limitation for actions for deficiency judgments after foreclosure, protects all substantial rights of the parties and its application held not unconstitutional as impairing the obligations of the contract.
    Appeal by plaintiff from Bone, J., at October Term, 1937, of Orange.
    Affirmed.
    
      Tbe plaintiff sued to recover a deficiency judgment upon a note secured by a mortgage deed upon certain land, after foreclosure. More tban one year bad elapsed after tbe mortgage sale, and tbe defendants pleaded tbe statute of limitations — chapter 529, Public Laws of 1933; Code 1935, sec. 437 (a).
    From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appealed.
    
      L. J. Phipps and Bonner D. Sawyer for plaintiff, appellant.
    
    
      J. S. Patterson and Brawley & Gant for defendants, appellees.
    
   Pee Ctjexam.

Tbe legal principles involved in tbis case are -very thoroughly discussed in Bateman v. Sterrett, 201 N. C., 59, 159 S. E., 14, and in tbis case there is a full citation of authority which we think substantially covers tbe controverted principles of law in tbe present case. We have examined chapter 529, Public Laws of 1933 — Code 1935, see. 437 (a) — and find no constitutional difficulty in its application to tbe facts of tbis ease. We think all tbe substantial rights of tbe parties have been sufficiently protected in tbe cited statute, and its application constitutes no impairment of tbe obligation of plaintiff's contract. Plaintiff, having set tbe statute in motion by its foreclosure sale, neglected to bring action upon tbe note within one year thereafter, and tbis action is therefore barred.

Tbe judgment is

Affirmed.