Falls v. . McCulloch

62 N.C. 140
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 5, 1867·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Reabe, J.

The clause of the will upon Avliich the advice of the court is asked is as follows:

“The balance of my property I allow to be sold and my just debts paid. The negroes to be sold at my wife’s death and equally divided among all my children.”

Some of the children died after the testator and in the lifetime of the tenant for life. The question is, was the remainder vested, so that the representatives of the deceased children take.

It is a vested remainder, and the representatives of the deceased children do take.

The doctrine governing this case is settled in the case of Conly v. Kincade, Win. Eq., 44.

Per Curiam.

Decree accordingly.

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

Falls v. . McCulloch, 62 N.C. 140 (N.C. 1867).

62 N.C. 140 (Falls v. . McCulloch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kring v. Missouri
107 U.S. 221 (Supreme Court, 1883)
Conly v. . Kincaid
60 N.C. 594 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1864)