Albritton v. . Sutton

31 N.C. 389
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 5, 1849
StatusPublished

This text of 31 N.C. 389 (Albritton v. . Sutton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Albritton v. . Sutton, 31 N.C. 389 (N.C. 1849).

Opinion

Rufpin, C. J.

The decree must be affirmed. For al- • though it be a general rule, that when particular legacies are payable at a future day, the legatee is not entitled to interest before the day, yet there is an established exception to that, when the gift is to an infant child, and the parent makes no other provision for his maintainance in the mean while. Crickets v. Dalby, 3 Ves, 10. Chamber v. Goldwin, 11 Ves. 1. Wynch v. Wynch, 1 Cox 433. Heath v. Perry, 3 Atk. 101. Sheledon v. North, 3 Atk. 430.

But here the words plainly import an immediate gift of the whole estate, except a small pecuniary legacy, and vested it immediately in the son, but defeasible upon the contingency of his dying under 21; and in that case it is perfectly settled, that the legatee takes the profits, until the divesting of his estate by the happening of the contingency. Nicholas v. Osborne, 2 P. Wms. 419. Shepherd v. Ingram, 1 Arab. 448. Skey v. Barnes, 3 Meriv. 340. Turner v. Whitted, 2 Hawks. 613. Spruill v. Moore, 5 Ired. Eq. 284.

Per Curiam. Decree affirmed with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 N.C. 389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albritton-v-sutton-nc-1849.