White v. White

Supreme Court of North Carolina

White v. White

102 S.E.2d 446, 248 N.C. 99, 1958 N.C. LEXIS 337

DecidedMarch 26, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 102 S.E.2d 446 (White v. White) 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

White v. White, 102 S.E.2d 446, 248 N.C. 99, 1958 N.C. LEXIS 337 (N.C. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The appellants assign as error the court’s adjudication that it was the intent of the testator to devise and bequeath to his wife, Hanna Dotson White, in fee simple, all the property mentioned in his will except 70 shares of stock specifically devised equally between his daughter, Shirley White Benfield, and his son, Richard Dotson White. The will and the court’s interpretation of it are parts of the record, and before us. The appellants conceded on the argument, and correctly so, that for them and those whom they represent to have any interest in the estate and, therefore, any standing in court, it would be necessary to construe the will as conveying a life estate only [100]*100to Hanna Dotson White, with the contingent remainder to the testator’s three children, Earl C. White, Jr., Shirley White Benfield, and Richard Dotson White, with final devisees and legatees to be determined by the call of the roll at the death of the life tenant. The will does not permit of the interpretation appellants seek to have the court place upon it. In no event does the will create a contingent remainder. The appellants, therefore, have no interest in the estate, contingent or otherwise. They are not parties aggrieved by the adjudication.

The judgment of the Superior Court of MecicleNbueg County is

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

The appellants assign as error the court’s adjudication that it was the intent of the testator to devise and bequeath to his wife, Hanna Dotson White, in fee simple, all the property mentioned in his will except 70 shares of stock specifically devised equally between his daughter, Shirley White Benfield, and his son, Richard Dotson White. The will and the court’s interpretation of it are parts of the record, and before us. The appellants conceded on the argument, and correctly so, that for them and those whom they represent to have any interest in the estate and, therefore, any standing in court, it would be necessary to construe the will as conveying a life estate only [100]*100to Hanna Dotson White, with the contingent remainder to the testator’s three children, Earl C. White, Jr., Shirley White Benfield, and Richard Dotson White, with final devisees and legatees to be determined by the call of the roll at the death of the life tenant. The will does not permit of the interpretation appellants seek to have the court place upon it. In no event does the will create a contingent remainder. The appellants, therefore, have no interest in the estate, contingent or otherwise. They are not parties aggrieved by the adjudication.

The judgment of the Superior Court of MecicleNbueg County is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 S.E.2d 446, 248 N.C. 99, 1958 N.C. LEXIS 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-white-nc-1958.