Hoyt v. . Copeland
153 S.E. 844, 199 N.C. 804, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 262
Opinion
No error is apparent on the record, and, as the case involves no new question of law, it seems of little avail to set out the will or the facts inducing its interpretation. That the decision is authorized, would seem to be supported by what was said in Trust Co. v. Lentz, 196 N. C., 398, 145 S. E., 776.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hoyt v. . Copeland, 153 S.E. 844, 199 N.C. 804, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 262 (N.C. 1930).
153 S.E. 844 (Hoyt v. . Copeland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hayes v. Turner
391 S.E.2d 513 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)
Holt v. Holt
61 S.E.2d 448 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1950)