Gold v. Price
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MORRIS, Judge.
In their first assignment of error defendants contend the trial court erred in holding that testatrix did not create a trust for the maintenance of her grave and Tom Gold’s grave. We find this assignment of error without merit for several reasons. First, as we pointed out in Starling v. Taylor, 1 N.C. App. 287, 290-291, 161 S.E. 2d 204 (1968), “[i]t is well settled in this State that three circumstances must concur in order to constitute a valid trust: (1) sufficient words to raise a trust, (2) a definite subject or trust res, and (3) an ascertained object. [Citations omitted.]”…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Clark v. ConnorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- Dunn v. . HinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Taylor v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Anders v. AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Starling v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
3Cited by4 opinions
- Palmer v. KetnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Gold v. PriceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Ruth K. Child v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Ruth K. Child v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976