Lyon v. . Russ

Ashe, J. We concur with His Honor in the opinion intimated by him on the trial below, in regard to the validity of the sale, and it is therefore unnecessary to consider the other question presented on the appeal respecting the homestead. It is provided by section 254 of the Code that a docketed judgment shall be, “ alien on the real property in the county where the same is docketed, of any person against whom any such judgment shall be rendered, and which he may have at the time of the docketing thereof in the county in which such real property is situated, or which he shall acquire at any time for ten years from the time of docketing-the same in the county where the judgment roll was filed.” *590 An interpretation has been given to this section, by this ■court, in the case of Pasour v. Rhyne, 82 N. C., 149, where it is held that it is the judgment alone which creates alien on real property, and the office of the execution issued upon a ■docketed judgment is to enforce the lien by the sale of the land'upon. which it has attached, and that the lien of a judgment, docketed under this section, is lost by the lapse of ten years from the date of the docketing of the judgment; and this, notwithstanding execution has issued within the ten years. This authority is directly in point, and settles the question. The sale of land under an execution is different under the present system from what it was formerly, so far as the rights of a purchaser under a dormant judgment are concerned; for now, as the execution contains the date of tire docketing of the judgment, the purchaser is affected with notice and stands in no better condition than the plaintiff in the action when he is the purchaser. There is no error. Let this be certified to the superior ■court of Bladen county, &c. No error. ‘ Affirmed.