Trustees of the Rex Hospital v. Board of Commissioners

79 S.E.2d 892, 239 N.C. 312, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 373
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 29, 1954
Docket457
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 79 S.E.2d 892 (Trustees of the Rex Hospital v. Board of Commissioners) 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
Trustees of the Rex Hospital v. Board of Commissioners, 79 S.E.2d 892, 239 N.C. 312, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 373 (N.C. 1954).

Opinion

Denny, J.

The primary purpose of this litigation is to determine whether the trustees of the Eex Hospital, a corporation, acting through its trustees, and Wake County, acting through its Board of County Commissioners, have the legal right to^execute the proposed deed, lease, and escrow agreement, referred to hereinabove, for the purposes indicated.

The appellants contend, particularly Wake County and the guardian ad litem for the heirs at law of John Eex, et al., that there is nothing in the record to support the view that the hospital plant and the facilities now owned and operated by the trustees of Eex Hospital would need any expansion or improvement if the hospital were operated solely for the care and treatment of the sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh, and that there is nothing in the record to indicate that the present income and assets of the corporation are not sufficient to enable the trustees to operate the hospital for that limited purpose. They contend further that only in the event the income and assets of the hospital are insufficient to provide for the care and treatment of the sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh, is it permissible under the law to modify the trust. Furthermore, evbn in that event, the modification, it is contended, should be only to the extent necessary to permit the trustees to take care of as many of the sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh as can be cared for by means of the income and assets of the trust and should not be modified so as to permit the consummation of the proposed plan.

*326 These contentions are based on certain provisions contained in the will of John Eex and Chapter 6 of the Private Laws of North Carolina, 1840-41, which are as follows :

1. “It being my desire to provide a comfortable retreat for the sick and afflicted poor belonging to the city of Ealeigh, in which they may have the benefit of skillful medical aid and proper attention, it is my will that a lot or parcel of land containing twenty-one acres adjoining the city of Ealeigh on the southwest side, being the same purchased by me of the commissioners appointed for selling a part of the public lands, and which is comprised in the general devise of all my lands to the aforesaid Duncan Cameron and Geo. W. Mordecai in trust as before mentioned, be appropriated for the erection thereon of an infirmary or hospital for the sick and afflicted poor of the city of Ealeigh and for no other use or purpose whatsoever.

“And for the endowment of said hospital as far as I have the ability to do so, it is my will that all the money belonging to me, all the debts due me, and all the rest and residue of my estate hereinbefore given, devised and bequeathed by me to the said Duncan Cameron and Geo. W. Mordecai in trust and not otherwise specially appropriated be, and they are hereby appropriated to the endowment of said hospital, and whenever the constituted authorities of the city of Ealeigh shall legally appoint trustees capable in law of holding the same, then the said Duncan Cameron and Geo. W. Mordecai or the survivor of them or the executor or executors of the survivor of them, shall convey the said lot or parcel of land and the funds accruing from the money belonging to me, the debts due and the rest and residue of my estate as above described to the said trustees, or their successors duly appointed in trust forever, for the execution and endowment of such hospital and no other use or purpose whatsoever.”

2. The above Act prescribes the method for the appointment of five trustees to take and hold the assets devised under the will of John Eex. Such trustees, according to the Act,- must be approved by the Supreme Court, now changed by the amendment hereinabove referred to, to the Superior Court. The Act further provides that when the trustees were nominated and affirmed, they would be “a body corporate and politic by the name of the ‘Trustees of the Eex Hospital/ and shall be able and capable in law to receive and hold the property and effects, devised and bequeathed by the said John Eex in and by his said will and to use and apply the same to and for the purposes (and none other) specified in said will, and also to receive donations of lands or personal estate either by deed or will for the purposes aforesaid (and none other) and to have succession, to sue and be sued, and to have the other powers incident to corporation in regard to the charity created by the said will and for no other purposes.”

*327 The appellants place great stress upon the provisions of the devise and the statute enacted in connection therewith, which require that the property devised and donations received shall be used for the construction of an infirmary or hospital for the sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh, and for the endowment of the hospital, and for no other purpose. (Emphasis added.) They take the position that when these provisions are rightly construed the trustees of Eex Hospital are not authorized to expend any funds received by them to provide hospital facilities in excess of those required for the care of the sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh. We do not concur in this view. In our opinion it was the intention of John Eex to limit the use of the funds to be derived from his estate, but not to limit the use of the hospital facilities to be provided so as to prevent their use as a general public hospital. In expressing his desire to provide a comfortable retreat for the sick and áfflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh in which they might have the benefit of skillful medical aid and proper attention, he did not limit the use of the proposed infirmary or hospital to the sick and afflicted poor of Ealeigh and for no other purpose. He devised his property for the purpose of providing such infirmary or hospital for the sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh and to endow the institution in so far as he could do so, and directed that the funds derived from his estate were to be used for the accomplishment of the above objectives, and for no other purpose.

If the contentions of the appellants were correct and should be upheld, it would be necessary to conclude that the facilities of Eex Hospital are already far in excess of the needs of the indigent sick and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh even though it appears from Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 19, that during the last five years the cost of caring for charity patients has averaged $158,775.32 annually. Furthermore, for the trustees of Eex Hospital and the courts to have construed the trust in the manner now contended, it would have been impractical if not impossible from an economic standpoint to have provided the facilities and the staff necessary to render competent medical services even to the sibk and afflicted poor of the City of Ealeigh.

These appellants seem to have overlooked the provisions contained in paragraph three of the above Act, as well as the former decisions of this Court involving the John Eex trust.

Section 3 of the above Act reads as follows: “And be it further enacted: That the commissioners of the city of Ealeigh, . . . may, ...

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

Related

Maready v. City of Winston-Salem
467 S.E.2d 615 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1996)
Madison Cablevision, Inc. v. City of Morganton
386 S.E.2d 200 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1989)
Sides v. Cabarrus Memorial Hospital, Inc.
213 S.E.2d 297 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
Foster v. North Carolina Medical Care Commission
195 S.E.2d 517 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1973)
Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. John Thomasson Construction Co.
168 S.E.2d 358 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1969)
Habuda v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, Inc.
164 S.E.2d 17 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 S.E.2d 892, 239 N.C. 312, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trustees-of-the-rex-hospital-v-board-of-commissioners-nc-1954.