Murray v. . Oliver
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Caswell County, at Fall Term 1848. On the 30th of January 1827, Stephen Oliver made his will in which the residuary clause is as follows : ‘if there should be any remaining, after paying the moneys that I am security for him for, as for the balance of my estate, my desire is, that it shall be equally divided among the whole of my children during their natural lives.
Read the full summary
Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Caswell County, at Fall Term 1848. On the 30th of January 1827, Stephen Oliver made his will in which the residuary clause is as follows : ‘if there should be any remaining, after paying the moneys that I am security for him for, as for the balance of my estate, my desire is, that it shall be equally divided among the whole of my children during their natural lives. But my will is, that, if either of them die without a lawful heir, the whole of the property loaned them by me be returned for an equal division among the rest of my children.” By a…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, J.
Whatever might have been the construction of the residuary clause, had it stood upon the original publication in 1827, it is put beyond doubt, by the republication in May 1828, by the codicil of that date. For, by the republication, the will is made to speak and operate from that time. The act of 1827, ch. 7 had then gone into effect, and gave efficacy to the limitation over. Whatever doubt was once entertained, it is now unquestionably settled, that adding a codicil is a republication,. and the codicil brings the will to it, and make it a will from the date of the codicil. Much more must it…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Stevens v. MyersOregon Supreme Court · 1912
- Taft v. StearnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Manship v. StewartIndiana Supreme Court · 1914
- Young v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960