Clarke v. Wineke

216 N.C. 238
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 27, 1939·Published

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The will in question confers no power of sale on the executor as was the case in Seagle v. Harris, 214 N. C., 339, 199 S. E., 271, cited and relied upon by appellant. It would seem, therefore, that the executor should proceed in the usual way to sell the “further assets” of the estate in order to pay the debts in accordance with the directions of the testatrix. Neighbors v. Evans, 210 N. C., 550, 187 S. E., 796.

The demurrer was properly sustained, though the interpleader will doubtless be permitted to recast his petition. Harris v. Board of Education, ante, 147.

Affirmed.

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

Clarke v. Wineke, 216 N.C. 238 (N.C. 1939).

216 N.C. 238 (Clarke v. Wineke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Seagle v. . Harris
199 S.E. 271 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1938)
Neighbors v. . Evans
187 S.E. 796 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1936)