Legal Opinion

Whitehurst v. Hinton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 26, 1936PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConnor, J.

There is no error in the judgment in this action that plaintiffs, as heirs at law of John L. Hinton and of his daughter, Mary F. Hinton, both of whom died intestate, are now the owners of an undivided one-sixth interest, and that defendants, who are the remaining heirs at law of the said John L. Hinton and of the said Mary F. Hinton, are now the owners of an undivided five-sixths interest, in all the lands of which the said John L. Hinton died seized and possessed, except such of said lands as are now owned by purchasers for value, without notice, who claim title to the lands conveyed to them…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Newbern v. LeighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  2. Newbern v. . LeighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Holt v. HoltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. In Re Will of PuettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. Whitehurst v. AbbottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Jones v. WarrenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  5. Hunt v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

8 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