Legal Opinion

Matter of Estate of Forrest

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 7, 1984No. 8315SC24PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHNSON, Judge.

The question presented by the propounders’ appeal is whether the evidence is sufficient to be submitted to the jury on the issue of undue influence. Caveators have also requested, pursuant to Rule 10(d) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, that the directed verdict in propounders’ favor on the issue of mental capacity be reversed if this Court should determine that a retrial is necessary. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the trial court erred in denying the propounders’ motion for a directed verdict on the issue of undue influence, but correctly allowed the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In Re the Purported Will of AndrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. In Re Will of MuellerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  3. In Re Will of Amelia EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  4. In Re Will of TurnageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  5. In Re the Will of BallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. In Re the Will of JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
  2. In Re the Will of CampbellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  3. In Re the Will of DurhamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  4. In Re Will of JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
  5. In re the Will of JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008

8 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