Schwren v. . Falls
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by plaintiffs, from Justice, J., at November Term, 1915, of CLEVELAND.
1Opinion of the Court
Clark:, C. <7.
This is a controversy submitted without action, and it is agreed that if the plaintiff Pauline Sehwren is seized in fee simple of the land and can make a valid conveyance of the same, she is entitled to judgment. The validity of the deed tendered the defendant by the plaintiffs depends upon the following language in the will of J. M. Washburn:
“3. I give and bequeath to my daughter Pauline the place known as the T. B. Washburn place,” etc. (describing same) “to have the full use and control of the said land, but not to dispose of any part of said land unless she become a widow…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wool v. Fleetwood.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Latimer v. . WaddellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
- Hardy Bros. v. GallowaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Christmas v. . WinstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Pritchard v. . BaileySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Smith v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Barco v. . OwensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Brooks v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Miller v. . TeerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Burcham v. . BurchamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.