In Re Leonard

Supreme Court of North Carolina

In Re Leonard

12 S.E.2d 222, 218 N.C. 738, 1940 N.C. LEXIS 82

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 20, 1940

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 12 S.E.2d 222 (In Re Leonard) 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

In Re Leonard, 12 S.E.2d 222, 218 N.C. 738, 1940 N.C. LEXIS 82 (N.C. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

ScheNCK, J.

Tbe sole question presented on tbis appeal is: “Does tbe will of tbe late Florence Siceloff Leonard name an executrix?” We are constrained to answer in tbe negative.

Tbe only mention made of Mrs. J. Tbomas Leonard is in tbe second page of tbe holograph will labeled “All I have is tbis.” Tbe mention of tbe name of the petitioner, we think, is made simply to designate or locate certain property of tbe testatrix which tbe petitioner bad in charge or in her possession. We do not see in these words any commitment of tbe execution of her will to Mrs. J. Tbomas Leonard or any designation of her as tbe person whom tbe testatrix desired to administer her estate. An executor is “One to whom another man commits by bis last will tbe execution of tbat will and testament.” 2 Bl. Comm., 503.

While it is our duty to interpret tbe will from its four corners, and to carry out tbe intent of tbe testatrix as gathered therefrom, we are not permitted to write into tbe will tbat which the testatrix failed so to do.

Tbe judgment of tbe Superior Court is

Reversed.

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

ScheNCK, J.

Tbe sole question presented on tbis appeal is: “Does tbe will of tbe late Florence Siceloff Leonard name an executrix?” We are constrained to answer in tbe negative.

Tbe only mention made of Mrs. J. Tbomas Leonard is in tbe second page of tbe holograph will labeled “All I have is tbis.” Tbe mention of tbe name of the petitioner, we think, is made simply to designate or locate certain property of tbe testatrix which tbe petitioner bad in charge or in her possession. We do not see in these words any commitment of tbe execution of her will to Mrs. J. Tbomas Leonard or any designation of her as tbe person whom tbe testatrix desired to administer her estate. An executor is “One to whom another man commits by bis last will tbe execution of tbat will and testament.” 2 Bl. Comm., 503.

While it is our duty to interpret tbe will from its four corners, and to carry out tbe intent of tbe testatrix as gathered therefrom, we are not permitted to write into tbe will tbat which the testatrix failed so to do.

Tbe judgment of tbe Superior Court is

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 S.E.2d 222, 218 N.C. 738, 1940 N.C. LEXIS 82, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-leonard-nc-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack