Legal Opinion

Ray v. Ray

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 20, 1967No. 691PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShaep, J.

Whenever applicable, the rule in Shelley’s case applies to both real and personal property in this jurisdiction. Riegel v. Lyerly, 265 N.C. 204, 143 S.E. 2d 65; Chappell v. Chappell, 260 N.C. 737, 133 S.E. 2d 666; Martin v. Knowles, 195 N.C. 427, 142 S.E. 313; Welch v. Gibson, 193 N.C. 684, 138 S.E. 25; Hampton v. Griggs, 184 N.C. 13, 113 S.E. 501; Starnes v. Hill, 112 N.C. 1, 16 S.E. 1011. There are many statements of the rule. One, approved by the Court in Martin v. Knowles, supra at 429, 142 S.E. at 313, is:

“The rule in Shelley’s case says, in substance, that if an estate of freehold be…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Lide v. MearsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Starnes v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  3. Puckett v. . MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  4. Jones v. . WhichardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  5. Hampton v. GriggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Olive v. BiggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Wachovia Bank and Trust Co. v. LivengoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  3. White v. LackeyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  4. Ray ex rel. Estate of Tate v. Tate ex rel. Last Will & Testament of TateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1979
  5. Olive v. BiggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API