White v. Alexander
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EXUM, Justice.
The Court of Appeals erred insofar as it decided that the testatrix’s son, Sam, was to share in the estate devised ultimately “to my heirs,” a class which it properly held under this will should be fixed and identified at testatrix’s death.
In construing this will we are well reminded that:
“The epigram of Sir William Jones over 250 years ago ‘no will has a brother’ has been often quoted by the courts. (Citations omitted.) Two wills rarely use exactly the same language. Every will is so much a thing of itself, and generally so unlike other wills, that it must be construed by…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Hilliard v. . KearneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853
- Patterson v. McCormickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Sain v. Baker.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
- Witty v. . WittySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Burden v. . LipsitzSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Wachovia Bank and Trust Co. v. ChamblessCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- Rawls v. RideoutCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Atkins v. BurdenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Hollowell v. HollowellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
- Hooks v. MayoCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.