Legal Opinion · Dissent
Yount v. Yount
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided December 12, 1962No. 310Published
1DissentParker, J.
“A codicil is a supplement to a will, annexed for the purpose of expressing the testator’s after*243thought or amended intention. [Citing authority.] It is to be construed with the will itself, and the two are to be considered as constituting a single instrument.” Smith v. Mears, 218 N.C. 193, 10 S.E. 2d 659. As a general rule, the courts are opposed to assuming that a codicil revokes a will by being inconsistent therewith. It seems to be settled law that a codicil does not revoke a will unless the testator’s intention to revoke is clear; and, consequently, there must be an absolute, clear and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Smith Ex Rel. Smith v. MearsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Baker v. . EdgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Toms v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938