Murphey v. . Avery and McDowell, Adm.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
The plaintiff, as the widow of James Murphey, filed her petition in the County Court of Burke,' for the year’s allowance which the act of 1796 (Rev. ch. 469,) secures to widows, out of the personal property of their husbands, when they shall have died intestate. ■■ The case was carried by appeal to the Superior Court, where the defendants, relied upon the covenants in an ante-nuptial contract between the plaintiff and her late husband, as a bar to. her claim.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff, as the widow of James Murphey, filed her petition in the County Court of Burke,' for the year’s allowance which the act of 1796 (Rev. ch. 469,) secures to widows, out of the personal property of their husbands, when they shall have died intestate. ■■ The case was carried by appeal to the Superior Court, where the defendants, relied upon the covenants in an ante-nuptial contract between the plaintiff and her late husband, as a bar to. her claim. The words of the covenant relied on were, “ that she” (the plaintiff) “will not at any .time, either now or hereafter, set up any claim…
1Opinion of the Court
Gaston, Judge.
— The sole question presented by the case, is, whether the plaintiff is not tarred of all claim to the allowance for which she has petitioned, by the operation of certain covenants, contained in an ante-nuptial contract, made between herself and her late husband. This involves two inquiries; first, whether any of these covenants embraces the claim; and, secondly, if they do, whether they constitute a valid defence against it. On the first inquiry, we are of opinion with the defendants. The covenants extend to every claim, of every sort, which she can set up to the real or…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Perkins v. Brinkley.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903