Doe Ex Dem. of Galloway v. Yates

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Doe Ex Dem. of Galloway v. Yates

12 N.C. 296

DecidedDecember 5, 1827

StatusPublished

This text of 12 N.C. 296 (Doe Ex Dem. of Galloway v. Yates) 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

Doe Ex Dem. of Galloway v. Yates, 12 N.C. 296 (N.C. 1827).

Pincite

Opinion

Hare, Judge

It appears to me, that the judgment given in the Superior Court, upon the special verdict, was correct. The act of 1824, (BctJ. c. 225,) requires that the signature and handwriting of the testator should be proved by three witnesses. Here this has been done. Tiie other circumstances attending the probate, such as with whom the will was deposited for safe-keeping, or where it was found, are left by the act to be established by the same evidence that is ordinarily used in other cases. To establish these, three witnesses are not in *298 dispensable ", tlie testimony offered was relevant and pfo-por, and if believed, sufficient to authorise the probate.

I’thcrefore think, the judgment of the Superior Court. should be affirmed.

Pee Curiam. — Judgment affirmed.

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

Hare, Judge

It appears to me, that the judgment given in the Superior Court, upon the special verdict, was correct. The act of 1824, (BctJ. c. 225,) requires that the signature and handwriting of the testator should be proved by three witnesses. Here this has been done. Tiie other circumstances attending the probate, such as with whom the will was deposited for safe-keeping, or where it was found, are left by the act to be established by the same evidence that is ordinarily used in other cases. To establish these, three witnesses are not in *298 dispensable ", tlie testimony offered was relevant and pfo-por, and if believed, sufficient to authorise the probate.

I’thcrefore think, the judgment of the Superior Court. should be affirmed.

Pee Curiam. — Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 N.C. 296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doe-ex-dem-of-galloway-v-yates-nc-1827.