The defendant William Beatty, having been duly served with a copy of the decree made in this case, and having refused to perform that decree, we are of opinion that an attachment ought to issue to compel a performance.
Armstrong v. Beaty, 1 N.C. 33, 1 Cam. & Nor. 33 (1800)
June 1800
·
North Carolina Court of Conference
1 N.C. 33, 1 Cam. & Nor. 33
John Armstrong et al. against William Beaty, and James Graham Beaty.
This was a case in equity from Salisbury District; the record states, that at September Term, 1799, the complainants obtained a decree against the defendants, and had legally served them with a writ of execution of the said decree, as appears from the return made on said writ by the Sheriff of Lincoln—it further states, that William Beaty, one of the defendants, hath absolutely refused, and still doth refuse to perform the said decree: and the question reserved for the opinion of the Judges at their meeting this term, was, what process is proper to enforce compliance with a decree made by the Superior Courts of Equity.