Doe on Demise of Beasley v. Whitehurst

9 N.C. 437
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 5, 1823
StatusPublished

This text of 9 N.C. 437 (Doe on Demise of Beasley v. Whitehurst) 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 on Demise of Beasley v. Whitehurst, 9 N.C. 437 (N.C. 1823).

Opinion

Taylor, Chief-Justice.

The part of Henry White’s will, which forms part of the case, would, before the act of 1784, have conveyed to his three sons estates-tail iu the land devised, which by that act, are converted into fees-simple. The opposite claimants of the part devised to Caleb White are his brothers and sisters of the whole blood and representatives of deceased brothers and sisters, on one side, and the representatives of his half brother on the other side. It is altogether unnecessary to consider in this case, whether Caleb acquired the land by descent or purchase, because, there is but one side of half blood, and they are of the paternal side. So that in either case, they or their representatives of equal degree with the whole blood, are entitled to the inheritance, under the third section of the act and its provisos, and the proviso of the second section, ft follows, that the representatives of Henry White, the deceased half brother of Caleb, are entitled to the share which their father might have claimed, had he lived $ and that the verdict is wrong in having excluded them. There must consequently be a new trial.

In this opinion, ñaxi and Henderson, Judges, curved. COM

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 N.C. 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doe-on-demise-of-beasley-v-whitehurst-nc-1823.