McDaniel v. Heirs of McDaniel
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Buncombe county, at Fall Term, 1842, his Honor Judge Pearson-presiding. This was a petition for dower. The defendants moved to set aside the report of the jury, because the one-third part assigned as dower, exceeded in value one-third of the whole. From the evidence offered to the court it appeared, that the land, although consisting of several parcels acquired at different times, adjoined.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Buncombe county, at Fall Term, 1842, his Honor Judge Pearson-presiding. This was a petition for dower. The defendants moved to set aside the report of the jury, because the one-third part assigned as dower, exceeded in value one-third of the whole. From the evidence offered to the court it appeared, that the land, although consisting of several parcels acquired at different times, adjoined. There were 639 acres, worth about 1800 dollars. The dwelling house, barn, &c. were comfortable log buildings, usual on farms. The houses, orchard, meadow and…
1Opinion of the Court
n, i Ruffin, O. J.
m. , . . , , The question in this case is as to the mode of estimating the proportion of the husband’s lands, to be allotted to the widow for dower. The law gives her one-third part, and in ascertaining that part, is regard to be had to quantity alone or to value? It must be admitted, we think, that the purposes of justice are best effected by allotting the third in reference to the value. That is the substance of the thing. If quantity alone was to govern, a wide and dangerous latitude would be left to Sheriffs and Jurors acting in pais, who might and perhaps often would…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Stiner v. . CawthornSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1838