Legal Opinion

Dull v. Dull

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 11, 1950No. 233PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.

In the interpretation of a deed, the intention of the grantor must be gathered from the four corners of the instrument and every part thereof given effect, unless it contains conflicting provisions which are irreconcilable, or a provision which is contrary to public policy or runs counter to some rule of law. Ellis v. Barnes, 231 N.C. 543, 57 S.E. 2d 772; Edgerton v. Harrison, 230 N.C. 158, 52 S.E. 2d 357; Boyd v. Campbell, 192 N.C. 398, 135 S.E. 121; Willis v. Trust Co., 183 N.C. 267, 111 S.E. 163; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N.C. 486, 88 S.E. 774.

The plaintiffs are relying upon the case of…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Willis v. Mutual Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  2. Boyd v. . CampbellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Springs v. HopkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  4. Ingram v. . EasleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  5. Williams v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Griffin v. SpringerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Lackey v. Hamlet City Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  3. Williams v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  4. Quevedo v. DeansSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. BEVIRT v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2026

2 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