Legal Opinion

Heyer v. Bulluck

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 15, 1936PublishedCited by 91 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

The cardinal principle in the interpretation of wills is to discover the intent of the testator, looking at the instrument from its four corners, and to give effect to such intent, unless contrary to some rule of law or at variance with public policy. Jolley v. Humphries, 204 N. C., 672, 167 S. E., 417; Ellington v. Trust Co., 196 N. C., 755, 147 S. E., 286; Westfeldt v. Reynolds, 191 N. C., 802, 133 S. E., 168; Whitehurst v. Gotwalt, 189 N. C., 577, 127 S. E., 582; Witty v. Witty, 184 N. C., 375, 114 S. E., 482; 28 R. C. L., 211. “The will must be construed, Taking it by its four corners’…

2Cases cited62 opinions

  1. Towne v. EisnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  2. Whitfield v. Garris.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  3. Carroll v. HerringSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  4. Cole v. Industrial Fibre Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  5. Hilliard v. . KearneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853

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

3Cited by91 opinions

  1. WACHOVIA BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. WolfeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Bryant v. . ShieldsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  3. Williams v. . RandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  4. Bryant v. ShieldsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Coppedge v. CoppedgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951

86 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