Legal Opinion

Kornegay v. . Miller

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 28, 1905PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Dissent · HokeHoke, J.

James F. Kornegay at the time of his death was seized in fee of a tract of land in the city of Goldsboro, containing about fifteen acres, of which the land described in the complaint is a portion. Said Kornegay died on 13 August, 1883, having executed his last will and testament appointing his son W. F. Kornegay executor thereof, which was duly proven and the executor therein qualified. The testator left surviving, his children, the said W. F. Kornegay, John J. Kornegay and the plaintiff A. U. Kornegay, and his widow, Fannie E. Kornegay. Item VII of said will is in the following words: "I…

Also in this document: Dissent · Hoke.

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Hobgood v. HobgoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Watson v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
  3. Beacom v. AmosSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  4. Lee v. OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Bodenhamer v. . WelchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Woody v. . CatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. Buffaloe v. BlalockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  3. Creek v. Walker.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  4. Jernigan v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  5. Stewart v. McDadeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API