Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Creecy

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 21, 1925PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1DissentVarser, J.

The issues submitted to the jury and their answers thereto were as follows:

"1. Was the execution of the paper-writing purporting to be the last will and testament of Miss Hennie P. Creecy procured by undue influence of Mrs. Nannie C. Cahoon, or others, as alleged in the caveat? Answer: Yes.
"2. Did Miss Hennie P. Creecy at the time of the execution of said paper-writing, to wit, 28 October, 1922, have sufficient mental capacity to execute the same? Answer: No.
"3. Is the paper-writing propounded, and every part thereof, the last will and testament of Miss Hennie P. Creecy? Answer: No."

Nash, C.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. In Re Will of CravenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Barnhardt v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
  3. In Re Will of RossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  4. In Re HintonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  5. Manatt v. ScottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In Re Will of TurnageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  2. In Re Will of Efird v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  3. In Re the Will of PridgenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  4. In Re Will of CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  5. In Re Will of BadgettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931

1 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