Legal Opinion

Andrew v. Hughes

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 29, 1956No. 737PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

The single question presented by this appeal is whether the devise to Clatie Andrew is a devise in fee simple, or is a devise in trust for the benefit of the plaintiffs.

The language of the testator indicates a clear intent to create an estate in fee simple in Clatie Andrew (Hughes). His first dispositive statement as to her is: “I will and devise that Clatie Andrew . . . shall have all of my real estate, . . . and I do hereby give and devise to my said niece Clatie Andrew ... to her, her heirs, and assigns in fee simple forever.” By the language that follows, which the plaintiffs contend…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. St. James v. Bagley.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  2. Brinn v. . BrinnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Carter v. . StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  4. Randall v. RandallIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Springs v. SpringsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pittman v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. Johnson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  3. Pittman v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Rouse v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  5. Pittman v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API