Voncannon v. Hudson Belk Co. of Asheboro, N. C., Inc.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.
Tbe intent of the testator is the polar star that-must guide the courts in the interpretation of a will. Coppedge v. Coppedge, 234 N.C. 173, 66 S.E. 2d 777; Buffaloe v. Blalock, 232 N.C. 105, 59 S.E. 2d 625; Elmore v. Austin, 232 N.C. 13, 59 S.E. 2d 205; Cannon v. Cannon, 225 N.C. 611, 36 S.E. 2d 17; Holland v. Smith, 224 N.C. 255, 29 S.E. 2d 888. This intent is to be gathered from a consideration of the will from its four corners, and such intent should be given effect unless contrary to some rule of law or at variance with public policy. House v. House, 231 N.C. 218, 56 S.E. 2d 695;…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Heyer v. BulluckSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Heyer v. . BulluckSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Carroll v. HerringSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
- Cannon v. . CannonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- Elmore v. AustinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Morris v. MorrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Ireland v. Pacific HomeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Rudisill v. HoyleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Snow v. . BoylstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. GreenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.