Hood v. . McElvain

2 S.E.2d 557, 215 N.C. 568, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 313
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 3, 1939
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 2 S.E.2d 557 (Hood v. . McElvain) 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
Hood v. . McElvain, 2 S.E.2d 557, 215 N.C. 568, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 313 (N.C. 1939).

Opinion

DeviN, J.

By tbis appeal tbe Court is called upon to determine tbe rights of tbe parties under tbe following clause of tbe will of R. G. Miller:

“In case Josephine G. Miller should die childless, I will that her share of my estate named above shall revert to my eight grandchildren except so much as she may wish to will to Christian benevolence.”

Previously in bis will tbe testator bad given to bis daughter Josephine (now tbe plaintiff Josephine Miller Hood) certain real and personal property. Tbe later disposition of tbis property, in tbe event she should die childless, does not affect tbe validity of tbe bequest of personal property previously given her, and as to that she takes it freed of any condition. Nixon v. Nixon, ante, 377. Tbe court below properly so held.

As to tbe real property devised, however, it is apparent that only a defeasible fee is conveyed (Whitfield v. Garris, 134 N. C., 24, 45 S. E., 904; Daly v. Pate, 210 N. C., 222, 186 S. E., 348; Merritt v. Inscoe, 212 N. C., 526, 193 S. E., 714), and that plaintiff’s title thereto is subject to be defeated, with limitation over, in tbe event she should die childless. Tbe power of disposition given in tbe quoted clause of tbe *569 will is not unlimited but is restricted to conveyance by will to Christian benevolence. Hampton v. West, 212 N. C., 315, 193 S. E., 290. In this respect the judgment of the court below must be modified to conform to this opinion.

Modified and affirmed.

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

Related

Finlayson v. Cabarrus Bank & Trust Co.
181 F. Supp. 838 (M.D. North Carolina, 1960)
Woodard v. Clark
72 S.E.2d 433 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1952)
Reynolds v. Commissioner
114 F.2d 804 (Fourth Circuit, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 S.E.2d 557, 215 N.C. 568, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hood-v-mcelvain-nc-1939.