Shoup v. AMERICAN TRUST COMPANY
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDeNNY, J.
The appellants seriously contend that the plaintiffs, being only part-time help, were not “employees of The Charlotte Observer” within the meaning of the will of Curtis B. Johnson and, therefore, the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiffs are entitled to legacies under the provisions of his will, citing Schouler on Wills (5th Ed.), Yol. 1, section 566a; Page on Wills, Lifetime Edition, Vol. 3, section 1035; Rood on Wills, section 460; Metcalf v. Sweeney, 17 R.I. 213, 21 A. 364, and In re Will of Johnson, 233 N.C. 570, 65 S.E. 2d 12.
It is stated in the above cited section of Schouler on…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Johnson v. Asheville Hosiery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Flynn v. CarsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1926
- Cochrane v. William Penn HotelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Hoffer Bros. v. SmithSupreme Court of Virginia · 1927
- Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. WaddellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McCain v. WombleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Crawford v. PhillipsNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2009
- Crawford v. PhillipsNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2008
- Crawford v. PhillipsNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2007