In Re Will of Evans
184 S.E. 818, 209 N.C. 828, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 363
Opinion
Affirmed on authority of Chancey v. Powell, 103 N. C., 159, 9 S. E., 298. “In the statute of limitations, there is an express exception in favor of the rights of those who may be infants, etc., at the time the right accrues, but if, at that time, there is no disability, although the right may, on the next day, pass to an infant, etc., it is not within the proviso, so that it has grown into a legal adage, ‘When the statute begins to run it continues to run.’ ” Mebane v. Patrick, 46 N. C., 23.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In Re Will of Evans, 184 S.E. 818, 209 N.C. 828, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 363 (N.C. 1936).
184 S.E. 818 (In Re Will of Evans) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Davis v. EI DuPont DeNemours & Co., Inc.
400 F. Supp. 1347 (W.D. North Carolina, 1974)
Rowland Ex Rel. Messer v. Beauchamp
116 S.E.2d 720 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)