Williams v. . Johnson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDeNny, J.
The appellants contend the court below erred in holding that the rule in Shelley’s case does not apply to 'the devise under consideration. The contention is untenable. It is clear that in using the phrase “their bodily heirs or issues surviving them,” the devisor meant children or issue of his grandchildren. Furthermore, this conclusion is supported by the limitation over to the effect that “in the event any of the said grandchildren shall die without leaving him surviving issue or issues, then to his next of kin, in fee. simple forever.” Moore v. Baker, 224 N. C., 133, 29 S. E. (2d), 452;…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Puckett v. . MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Jones v. . WhichardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Williamson v. CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Williamson v. . CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Wallace v. . WallaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- McCain v. WombleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Whitson v. BarnettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Central Carolina Bank & Trust Company v. BassSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Clinard v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1963
- Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. GreenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.