Hill v. . Bell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Caveat, tried before his Honor, Ba-raes, J., at Fall Term 1866, of the Superior Court of Carteret. The will in question had an attestation olanse, bnt no .•subscribing witnesses: and it was duly proved to be in the ¡handwriting of the deceased, one W. S. Ward.
Read the full summary
Caveat, tried before his Honor, Ba-raes, J., at Fall Term 1866, of the Superior Court of Carteret. The will in question had an attestation olanse, bnt no .•subscribing witnesses: and it was duly proved to be in the ¡handwriting of the deceased, one W. S. Ward. In regard to the place of deposit, it was shown that in the Fall of 1862, tlie deceased was in the liabit of spending his nights with one John W Pelletier, and on one occasion brought -with him a box and trunk, and desired Pelletier to take care .of them, as they contained valuable papers. Shortly after-wards he ceased living with…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
The objections to the validity of the script propounded for probate as the last 'will and testament of William S. Ward were of two kinds: first, that the deceased intended to make and publish it as an attested, and not as a holograph will, and that therefore it was never so completed as to operate as a will; secondly, that if it were a holograph paper it was not found among the valuable papers and effects “ of the deceased, nor was it lodged in the hands of some person for safe keeping.”
1. The first objection is fully answered by the two cases of Harrison v. Burgess, 1 Hawks, 384, and Brown…
2Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Sheppard's WillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
- In Re Will of GoodmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- In Re Will of GroceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- In Re Will of WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- In Re Will of GilkeySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.