Legal Opinion

Paul v. . Willoughby

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 3, 1933PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

The only question raised in this apj)eal is whether the illegitimacy of the defendant, Helen Willoughby, the only child and heir at law of Eliza Jane Teal, prevents her from taking the property in controversy. We think not.

The part of Isham Teal’s will for ns to construe, is as follows:

“It is further my will and desire, that at my death my wife, Sarah Teal and my daughter, Eliza Jane Teal, shall hold in common, all my real estate and all my personal property not necessary to the discharge of the debts and charges against my estate, during the natural life of my said wife, Sarah Teal, should…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Harrell v. . HaganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  2. West Ex Rel. West v. MurphySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  3. Stisser v. StisserIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Lobe v. GoldheimCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1927
  5. Burche v. NealWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1929

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Elmore v. AustinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Trustees of Watts Hospital v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  3. Trustees of the Rex Hospital v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. Brown v. . HollandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API