Legal Opinion

WACHOVIA BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. Bryant

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 11, 1963No. 599PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSharp, J.

The basic rule of construction, and the refrain of every opinion which seeks to comprehend a testamentary plan, is that “ (t) he intent of the testator is the polar star that must guide the courts in tire interpretation of a will.” Coppedge v. Coppedge, 234 N.C. 173, 66 S.E. 2d 777. Courts have had considerable difficulty in determining whether a testator meant his beneficiaries to take per capita or per stirpes but, out of judicial experience, certain rules have devolved to help solve this perplexity. Burton v. Cahill, 192 N.C. 505, 135 S.E. 332.

The general rule, which has been stated and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Coppedge v. CoppedgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. Burton v. . CahillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Leggett v. . SimpsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  4. Walsh v. . FriedmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Ferrell v. BasnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Carriker v. CarrikerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
  2. Wing v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., NASupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Mitchell v. LoweryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. In Re Wilson's WillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  5. Roberts v. Northwestern BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

17 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