N.C. Gen. Stat. See also N.C. Gen. Stat. The mere presence of property was sufficient for in rem jurisdiction, whereas the presence of the defendant's person within the state was essential for in personam jurisdiction. These bifurcated jurisdictional standards have been maintained over the years, with the state courts exercising jurisdiction based on the presence of property in actions in rem and quasi in rem and exercising personal jurisdiction based on the presence of the person. Thus, although our statutes seem to address in rem jurisdiction as a separate type of jurisdiction from personal jurisdiction, our case law comports with the general understanding that in rem is but one type of personal jurisdiction and as such is subject to fairness and minimum contacts Constitutional safeguards.
Sovereign immunity is a defense to a claim of personal jurisdiction.
See Zimmer v. 87 N.C. App. In this case, however, petitioner is not suing the State. Were petitioner contesting the ownership of certain betterments to the property, as was the case in Taylor , the State could effectively claim sovereign immunity. In Taylor , petitioner claimed betterments on a parcel of property he had occupied but which had been judicially determined to actually belong to the State.