Young v. . Hood, Comr. of Banks
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
A reversal of the present judgment was adumbrated or foreshadowed by the decisions in Hood, Comr., v. Trust Co. and Brand, ante, 367, and Parker v. Hood, Comr., ante, 494.
The Brand case, supra, is a direct authority against the position taken in the “Young Case,” and the decision in Packer v. Hood, Comr., supra, is contrary to the preferential part of the judgment rendered in the “Cheshire Case.”
It should be observed that here the trustor himself placed several restrictions upon the trustee. Investments were not to be changed without the written consent of certain of the income beneficiaries,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lannin v. BuckleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Crabb v. . YoungNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Carter v. . YoungSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- McNinch v. . Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- City of Durham v. WrightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lightner v. . BooneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Hood, Comr. of Banks v. . CheshireSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Lichtenfels v. North Carolina National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Grant v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937