{
  "id": 8549455,
  "name": "SWAIN COUNTY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. HATTIE SHEPPARD, Formerly HATTIE NATIONS, and husband, D. C. SHEPPARD; and STERLING C. NATIONS and wife, WANDA NATIONS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Swain County v. Sheppard",
  "decision_date": "1978-02-21",
  "docket_number": "No. 7730SC308",
  "first_page": "391",
  "last_page": "394",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "35 N.C. App. 391"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "105 S.E. 2d 411",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1958,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "249 N.C. 96",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8608543
      ],
      "year": 1958,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/249/0096-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "176 S.E. 298",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "year": 1934,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "207 N.C. 180",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8624341
      ],
      "year": 1934,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/207/0180-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "224 S.E. 2d 677",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "29 N.C. App. 423",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8556201
      ],
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/29/0423-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "230 S.E. 2d 515",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "291 N.C. 442",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8558442
      ],
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/291/0442-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 385,
    "char_count": 6035,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.792,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.522161618980508e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4871550426298985
    },
    "sha256": "5657fc91c9abb58c2870c2b49613788ed2e28e34e10629072a7b00cf2cd644f1",
    "simhash": "1:bf96d6baf49e98d9",
    "word_count": 985
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:24:32.681632+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Parker and Arnold concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "SWAIN COUNTY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. HATTIE SHEPPARD, Formerly HATTIE NATIONS, and husband, D. C. SHEPPARD; and STERLING C. NATIONS and wife, WANDA NATIONS"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MARTIN, Judge.\nIn Session Laws 1973, Chapter 204, the General Assembly repealed G.S. 108-29 through G.S. 108-37.1, thereby abolishing the Old Age Assistance lien. The repeal included the following provision:\n\u201cThis act shall not apply to any claims and liens created pursuant to G.S. 108-29 prior to the effective date of this act, and such claims and liens shall be entitled to full and complete enforcement as by law heretofore provided.\u201d\nThis latter provision of the repealing act was amended by Session Laws 1975, Chapter 48, effective 13 March 1975, which provided:\n\u201cAll claims and liens created pursuant to G.S. 108-29 prior to the effective date of this act are hereby declared null and void, excepting those liens which have actually been coir lected by the county attorney prior to the effective date of this act.\u201d (Emphasis added.)\nIn denying defendants\u2019 motion to dismiss the foreclosure proceedings, the trial court concluded that the above emphasized language of the 1975 act \u201cdid not have the effect of voiding the judgment of [that] Court entered prior to the date of repeal by the Legislature.\u201d\nThe only question posed by this appeal is whether plaintiff\u2019s Old Age Assistance lien, having been reduced to judgment, was voided by the 1975 act abolishing all such liens which have not actually been collected prior to the effective date of the act.\nDefendants strenuously argue that the provisions of the 1975 act clearly rendered null and void all Old Age Assistance liens not actually collected prior to 13 March 1975; and that plaintiff\u2019s lien, though reduced to judgment, was not collected prior to this date as the county had recovered no money in satisfaction thereof. We must agree with the defendants.\nThe language used by the Legislature to delineate the subject exception is clear and unambiguous whether standing alone or viewed in conjunction with other relevant statutory provisions. Thus, we must give the language its plain and definite meaning and cannot superimpose provisions or limitations not contained therein. State v. Williams, 291 N.C. 442, 230 S.E. 2d 515 (1976); Fogle v. Board of Education, 29 N.C. App. 423, 224 S.E. 2d 677 (1976). In this connection, we note that it is beyond dispute that having a judgment in one\u2019s possession and actually collecting on that judgment, in point of legal significance, are two entirely different notions. Accordingly, we must conclude that by abolishing all liens except those actually collected, the Legislature intended to render null and void all rights, existing in favor of the county as a result of the payment of Old Age Assistance funds, upon which no monies had actually been recovered in satisfaction thereof.\nThat it is within the power of the Legislature to divest a county of a judgment, is without question. It is solely within the province of the Legislature to create, directly or indirectly, counties and like subdivisions and to invest them with powers to effectuate governmental purposes; thus, the Legislature may, in its discretion, increase, modify or abrogate these powers. See Saluda v. Polk County, 207 N.C. 180, 176 S.E. 298 (1934); see also Sanitary District v. Lenoir, 249 N.C. 96, 105 S.E. 2d 411 (1958). We find no violation of fundamental constitutional precepts in the abrogation, by legislative enactment, of a judgment existing in favor of a county.\nWe reverse the order of the trial court and remand the cause for entry of dismissal in accordance with this opinion.\nReversed and remanded.\nJudges Parker and Arnold concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MARTIN, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "McKeever, Edwards, Davis & Hays, by George P. Davis, Jr., for the plaintiff.",
      "Jenkins, Lucas, Babb, and Rabil, by Jonathan V. Maxwell, for the defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "SWAIN COUNTY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. HATTIE SHEPPARD, Formerly HATTIE NATIONS, and husband, D. C. SHEPPARD; and STERLING C. NATIONS and wife, WANDA NATIONS\nNo. 7730SC308\n(Filed 21 February 1978)\nSocial Security and Public Welfare\u2014 Old Age Assistance lien \u2014 judgment not collected \u2014 lien voided\nPlaintiff\u2019s Old Age Assistance lien against defendant\u2019s property which had been reduced to judgment but had not been enforced against the property was voided by Session Laws 1975, Chapter 48, which abolished all Old Age Assistance liens which had not actually been collected prior to the effective date of the Act.\nAppeal by defendants from Ferrell, Judge. Order entered 8 February 1977 in Superior Court, SWAIN County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 3 February 1978.\nFrom October, 1957, to November, 1966, defendant Hattie Nations Sheppard received Old Age Assistance payments totaling $4,497.00 from plaintiff acting through its Department of Public Welfare. O.S. 108-30.1 \u2014changed to G.S. 108-29 in 1969 and repealed in 1973 \u2014 provided for the creation of a general lien in favor of the county upon the real property of a recipient of such aid to the extent of the total amount of assistance paid.\nPursuant to this statute, plaintiff instituted action on 30 October 1967 to foreclose its lien on certain real property owned by defendant Hattie Nations Sheppard. No answer was filed and on 8 January 1968, judgment by default was entered against defendants directing that the realty be sold.\nOn 2 December 1969, an auction was held and the property was sold to the highest bidder for $6,000.00.\nOn 8 December 1969, prior to consummation of the auction sale, defendants moved to set aside the sale as null and void on the grounds that defendant Hattie Sheppard was then occupying the subject realty as her homesite and thus, pursuant to 108-34 (now repealed), a lien could not be enforced against this property.\nThe trial court entered an order temporarily enjoining the sal\u00e9 of the realty on 8 December 1969.\nOn 31 January 1977, defendants moved to dismiss the proceedings to enforce the lien based on two recent legislative enactments which abolished the Old Age Assistance lien. The trial court denied the motion and entered an order on 8 February 1977 dissolving the injunction and ordering the sale to proceed. Defendants appeal from this order.\nMcKeever, Edwards, Davis & Hays, by George P. Davis, Jr., for the plaintiff.\nJenkins, Lucas, Babb, and Rabil, by Jonathan V. Maxwell, for the defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0391-01",
  "first_page_order": 419,
  "last_page_order": 422
}