In re the Will of Jones

302 S.E.2d 480, 62 N.C. App. 325, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 2840
CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedMay 17, 1983
DocketNo. 824SC606
StatusPublished

This text of 302 S.E.2d 480 (In re the Will of Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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 the Will of Jones, 302 S.E.2d 480, 62 N.C. App. 325, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 2840 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983).

Opinion

HEDRICK, Judge.

In In Re Will of Puett, 229 N.C. 8, 13, 47 S.E. 2d 488, 492-493 (1948) (citation omitted), our Supreme Court held:

[W]here a will has been duly probated, the record affords conclusive evidence of its validity, until vacated by appeal, or declared void by a court of competent jurisdiction in a proceeding instituted for that purpose, and that the offer of proof of a will alleged to have been subsequently executed, without more, is not a direct but a collateral attack on the validity of the will. It is only by a caveat or proceeding in that nature that the validity of a properly probated will, and one without ‘inherent or fatal defect appearing on its face’ . . . may be brought in question.

See also In Re Will of Charles, 263 N.C. 411, 139 S.E. 2d 588 (1965). In the present case, the trial court correctly allowed the respondent’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition with prejudice. The petition discloses on its face an insurmountable bar to the relief sought.

The record discloses that the Last Will and Testament of Maria Kerr Jones, dated 14 December 1967 with a codicil attached and dated 18 February 1970, has been probated in common form. The petition in the present case asking that a paper writing dated 13 October 1977 be probated in solemn form as a second codicil, does not constitute a caveat proceeding to the will of [327]*327Maria Kerr Jones, dated 14 December 1967 and already probated in common form.

Affirmed.

Chief Judge VAUGHN and Judge Arnold concur.

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

Related

In Re Will of Charles
139 S.E.2d 588 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1965)
In Re Will of Puett
47 S.E.2d 488 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
302 S.E.2d 480, 62 N.C. App. 325, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 2840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-will-of-jones-ncctapp-1983.