Den on Demise of Seville v. Whedbee

12 N.C. 160

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: July 5, 1827
• Status: Published

Opinion

Tayjuor, Chief-Justice.

In the principal feature of this case, it is not distinguishable from Ballard v. Hill, where the maternal half brother was preferred to a more distant collateral, though the estate descended upon the brother, under whom he claimed, from fhe father. It was a contest between the maternal brothers and sisters, and the paternal cousin who was heir at common law. In this ease, the lessor of the Plaintiff is paternal half brother, and the estate descended to his brother from his mother. The record not disclosing that there are any |)P¡r,s neam. in degree on the side of the mother, the p[a¡nlj¡f¡¡, e„titied to recover.

The other question arising out of the facts stated, has also been adjudged in the case of Cutlar v. Cutlar, (2 Hawks 329.) There, the lessor of the Plaintiff was bom after the death of his brother ; but upon his birth, he became heir to him, and is consequently entitled according to the principles of the common law.

Per curiam. Judgment affirmed.