Osborne v. . Widenhouse

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Osborne v. . Widenhouse

56 N.C. 238

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedJune 5, 1857

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 56 N.C. 238 (Osborne v. . Widenhouse) 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

Osborne v. . Widenhouse, 56 N.C. 238 (N.C. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

Pearson. J.

Noah Furr acquired the land in controversy as devisee under the will of his grandfather Paul Furr. At the death of the devisor, Henry Furr, the father of Noah, was living, and would have taken the land as his heir, had he died without making a will; so Noah at the death of Paul, his grandfather, was not “ his heir or one of his heirs,” and, necessarily, took the land as & purchaser in its general sense, and not in the peculiar mode which, under the statute, is made to have the like effect as a descent. He took by devise, and could not have claimed as heir of his grandfather, had the latter died intestate. This is settled in Burgwyn v. Devereux, 1 Ire. Rep. *240 586, where the matter is fully elaborated, and the construction of the rule of descent is fixed. It follows that the land must be treated as a new acquisition by Noah Furr, and is transmitted to his uncles and aunts on the mother’s side as well as those on the side of the father. Let a decree be made for a sale and partition according to this opinion.

Peb Cubiam, Decree accordingly. •

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

Pearson. J.

Noah Furr acquired the land in controversy as devisee under the will of his grandfather Paul Furr. At the death of the devisor, Henry Furr, the father of Noah, was living, and would have taken the land as his heir, had he died without making a will; so Noah at the death of Paul, his grandfather, was not “ his heir or one of his heirs,” and, necessarily, took the land as & purchaser in its general sense, and not in the peculiar mode which, under the statute, is made to have the like effect as a descent. He took by devise, and could not have claimed as heir of his grandfather, had the latter died intestate. This is settled in Burgwyn v. Devereux, 1 Ire. Rep. *240 586, where the matter is fully elaborated, and the construction of the rule of descent is fixed. It follows that the land must be treated as a new acquisition by Noah Furr, and is transmitted to his uncles and aunts on the mother’s side as well as those on the side of the father. Let a decree be made for a sale and partition according to this opinion.

Peb Cubiam, Decree accordingly. •

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 N.C. 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osborne-v-widenhouse-nc-1857.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack