Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE STATE TO THE USE OF J. C. BARNES ET AL. v. ELIZABETH SHANNONHOUSE ET AL.

When a legacy is given to four children by name, and one of them dies in the lifetime of the testator, his legacy is lapsed and must go, as undisposed property, to the next of kin of the testator.

DANIEL, J.

We are of the same opinion with the judge below. (10) In Johnston v. Johnston, 38 N.C. 426, where the testator bequeathed the residue of his estate, not disposed of, to his wife and her six children, to be equally divided between them and their heirs, share and share alike, A., one of the six children, died in the lifetime of the testator. Held, that this bequest was not to the children as a class, but as if each had been particularly named; and as each was entitled to only one-seventh, the share would not be enlarged by the death of one in the lifetime of the testator; and that the share of A. lapsed and was undisposed of, and belonged to the next of kin of the testator, and to his widow. In the case now before us each of the four children was particularly named by the testator. The share of William, who died in the testator's lifetime, never vested in him, but lapsed, and became so much of the undisposed personal property of the testator, and of course went to the testator's next of kin. The judgment must be

PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. SHANNONHOUSE
(Dec 1, 1846)