Legal Opinion

Clarke v. Clarke

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 12, 1960No. 166PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMooRE, J.

“A limitation by . . . will ... to the heirs of a living person, shall be construed to be to the children of such person, ■unless a contrary intention appear by the . . . will.” G.S. 41-6. (Emphasis added.) In paragraphs 4 and 5 of the will of Maggie M. Clarke provision is made for the college education of the “heirs” of testatrix’s sons, Norman and Rudolph. These sons were living at the time of the execution of the will and survived the testatrix. There is nothing in the will which indicates that testatrix intended to use the word “heirs” in its technical sense. Indeed a contrary intent is…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Lide v. MearsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Little v. Wachovia Bank and Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. McPherson v. First & Citizens National Bank of Elizabeth CitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. Parker v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Hodges v. . StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Joyner v. DuncanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST COMPANY v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. North Carolina National Bank v. GoodeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  4. North Carolina National Bank v. NorrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  5. Palmer v. KetnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

4 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