Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re the Purported Last Will & Testament of Barnes

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 15, 2003No. COA01-1437Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHudson, Judge

I concur with the analysis of the issues pertaining to Frances Long’s testimony and the Testamentary Trust. However, because I believe that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in the management of the trial by having the jury first consider the validity of the 1989 will, and because I see no reversible error in the trial, I would affirm the judgment.

*163The majority asserts that, in managing the litigation of the caveat to the 1989 will, the trial judge should have first had the jury determine whether the 1967 will had been revoked. Had the jury ruled that the 1967 will was revoked,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brissie v. CraigSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Matter of Will of HesterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  3. In Re WestfeldtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  4. In Re Will of CharlesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Sigmund Sternberger Foundation, Inc. v. TannenbaumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

3 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