Legal Opinion
Brinkley v. Day
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided December 15, 1987No. 8721DC260PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
Defendant argues that the trial court erred in declaring that her interest in the apartment was limited to a license to occupy. She contends that the provision grants her a life estate. We agree and reverse the judgment of the trial court.
The relevant portion of the will reads as follows:
The real estate property located at and known as 1015 Caroline Avenue, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, shall become the property of Gary L. Brinkley and any and all income derived from the operation of these apartments shall be the income of Gary L. Brinkley. Helen W. Brinkley, my wife, is to…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Fulp v. FulpSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Wilson v. FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, REIDSVILLE, NCSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Wing v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., NASupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Young Women's Christian Ass'n of Asheville v. MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Joyner v. DuncanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Maintenance Equipment Co., Inc. v. Godley BuildersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
- Nelson v. BennettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Hershman-Tcherepnin v. TcherepninMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- Estate of Mary Edwards Helms Peacock, Deceased, Wilbur T. Edwards, Jr. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- Hollowell v. HollowellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.