Griffin v. . Lane

70 S.E. 627, 154 N.C. 372, 1911 N.C. LEXIS 277
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 22, 1911
StatusPublished

This text of 70 S.E. 627 (Griffin v. . Lane) 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
Griffin v. . Lane, 70 S.E. 627, 154 N.C. 372, 1911 N.C. LEXIS 277 (N.C. 1911).

Opinion

Clark, C. J.

In 1867 John Skinner died, leaving a will by which he devised all his property, of which the land in question is a part, to his five daughters, to be divided off and set apart to each as she should arrive at the age of 21, with a proviso that if any one or more of his daughters died before attaining the age of 21 and without heir or heirs, he gave such share or shares to be divided among his surviving daughters. In a codicil he' provided: “Should any one or more of my daughters die without bearing child or children, the portion of property left by her shall go to her surviving sisters.”

Each of the daughters reached the age of 21, and thereupon became vested with the absolute right to her share in fee simple, subject only to the provision in the codicil. That provision provides only for the restriction as to the property of any daughter "left by her” and when she shall die without bearing-child or children. Martha, one of said daughters, contracted to convey the land in question to the defendant upon payment of the purchase money named. She tendered a fee-simple deed, and the only objection raised by the defendant to the title is on the ground of the restriction in the codicil. That provision, however, is- no restriction upon the alienation by either daughter after arriving at 21 years of age. It merely provides that as to any daughter who should die, without bearing a child or children, the property left by her should go to her surviving sisters. Martha, therefore, had the full right to use, dispose of, or convey away the property, and could éonvey a fee simple to the defendant. Herring v. Williams, 153 N. C., 236.

Upon the case agreed judgment should have been entered in favor of the plaintiff.

Reversed.

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

Related

Herring v. . Williams
69 S.E. 140 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 S.E. 627, 154 N.C. 372, 1911 N.C. LEXIS 277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-lane-nc-1911.