Doe on the Demise of Branch v. Hunter
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Ejectment, tried before Saunders, J., at Fall Term, 1864 , of Halifax Superior Court. The plaintiff claimed title under the will of John Branch, deceased ; the tract in question being that described in the second clause, as follows: “ Then I give to my daughter, Martha E. Bradford, the following negroes, viz., &c., also my plantation between Burnt coat and Beaverdam swamp.”
Read the full summary
Ejectment, tried before Saunders, J., at Fall Term, 1864 , of Halifax Superior Court. The plaintiff claimed title under the will of John Branch, deceased ; the tract in question being that described in the second clause, as follows: “ Then I give to my daughter, Martha E. Bradford, the following negroes, viz., &c., also my plantation between Burnt coat and Beaverdam swamp.” The words in italics were afterwards erased, and cancelled by tbe testator, who made a memorandum thereof, at the foot of the will, in his own handwriting. Upon the probate of the will the cancelled words were rejected by…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, C. J.
His Honor erred in rejecting the evidence tending to show that the Enfield tract of land embraced the land in controversy ; see Institution for the Deaf, &c., v. Norwood, Bus. Eq., 65.
For this reason, in considering the other question, it is to be assumed that the land in controversy was considered and treated by the testator, in his life time, as a part of the Enfield tract of land.
We have then this case: The testator devises a part of the Enfield tract of land to his daughter, Mrs. Bradford, by these words: “ also my plantation between Burnt coat and Beaverdam swamp.” He then devises to his…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Reid v. . AlexanderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Peebles v. Graham.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901