Edens v. Foulks
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtMosRis, J.
The only question presented by plaintiff’s appeal is whether her interest in the land is a contingent remainder or a vested remainder.
The record is completely devoid of any information as to whether Albert L. Duggins is living. Since the complaint is silent as to this, and the question here presented would be moot if he were deceased, we assume that he is living.
If plaintiff’s interest is a contingent remainder, she has no standing to maintain an action for waste and forfeiture under G.S. 1-533. The rule was clearly enunciated by Taylor, C.J., speaking for the Court in Browne v. Blick, 7 N.C.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Starnes v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Witty v. WittySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Latham v. Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Scales v. . BarringerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Witty v. . WittySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Godfrey v. PatrickCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
- Jackson v. Don Johnson Forestry, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019
- Jackson v. Don Johnson Forestry, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019