Legal Opinion

Dalton v. . Houston

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1860PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Iredell county. The question in this case arises upon the construction of the will of Placebo Houston, which the executor therein named, submits to this Court for protection against the conflicting claims of the parties interested. The portions of the said will material to the consideration of the case, are as follows : “Item 2d.

Read the full summary

Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Iredell county. The question in this case arises upon the construction of the will of Placebo Houston, which the executor therein named, submits to this Court for protection against the conflicting claims of the parties interested. The portions of the said will material to the consideration of the case, are as follows : “Item 2d. I will and direct that after the payment of my debts, all the rest of my estate, both real and personal, shall be equally divided among my living children, and the children of my deceased children, the child or children of a…

1Opinion of the Court

Pearson, O'. J.

The pleadings involve the construction of the codicil, and its effect upon the provisions of the will. Does the codicil revoke that provision which gives to the testator’s grand-son, John A. Houston, one-fifth part of the estate ? Or has it simply the effect of naming the slaves which lie had before put into the possession of some of his children, and which the will, in general terms, directs to be accounted for as advancements, and of giving to John A. Houston one thousand dollars, including his interest in the money for the Jack?

The difference in these two results is very…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fuller v. HedgpethSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. Biddle v. . CarrawaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1860

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

Powered by the Exa API