Legal Opinion

Swink v. Swink

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1969No. 6919SC442PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtYaughN, J.

The appellant contends that the administration of this trust should be governed by the laws of the District of Columbia. The appellee contends that the law of North Carolina should apply. We do not deem it necessary to pass upon this question. We are convinced that under the law of either jurisdiction, the income from the trust under consideration is subject to execution to satisfy the judgment of the wife against the defendant-beneficiary for alimony, child support and counsel fees. The result is reached even if we were to assume, as the appellant contends, that this is a valid “spendthrift”…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. RobertsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1949
  2. Teague v. TeagueSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. Fannie Seidenberg v. Martha E. SeidenbergCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1955
  4. Mebane v. . MebaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1845
  5. Rayfield v. RayfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gibson v. GibsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  2. Rickenbaker v. RickenbakerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API