Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

48 N.C. 552

Tipton v. Tipton's Executor's

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided August 5, 1856

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1856-08-05

Petition for a legacy, tried before Manly, Judge, at the Fall Term, 1855, of Yancey Superior Court. Jonathan Tipton died in the year 1850, having made and published his last will and testament, wherein the defendants were appointed executors, who took upon themselves the administration of the assets.

Upon considering the case, the Court dismissed the… · Decided 1856-08-05

Nash, C. J.

¶1 There is error in the decree below. The plaintiff was, by the proper authorities, bound as an apprentice to Jonathan Tipton, who died nearly three years before the expiration of the indentures, having previously made his last will, and which, by the defendants, was duly proved in the proper County, and they qualified as executrix and executor thereof. By his will, the testator bequeaths to the plaintiff seventy-five dollars, in a horse, saddle and bridle, at his age of twenty-one. The defendants deny that the petitioner *554 has any right now, to call for his legacy, as he entered into a compromise with them, and received from them, in lieu of his legacy, a cow and calf, and sow and pigs. They further state in their answer, that at the time of this compromise, the petitioner was nineteen years of age.

¶2 There is no doubt, a legatee may receive from an executor, other things in lieu of the property devised to him; but to-give to such compromise, such effect, the legatee must he of an age when the law authorises him to act for himself, and make a valid contract. As the petitioner was an infant, under the age of twenty-one, when it was made, this alleged-compromise, therefore, was of no force and effect, and the petitioner is entitled to his legacy. But, though the compromise does not hind him, yet, having received a cow and calf, and. sow and pigs, from the defendants, in place of his legacy, he cannot hold those and recover his full legacy; he must account for the property so received; and there must he a reference to the master, if the parties desire it, to ascertain the value of the property so received by the petitioner.

¶3 It was further alleged in the answer, that the legacy was-intended by the testator to be in the place of the property he-was bound by his bond to advance the petitioner at the expiration of his indentures, and that the legacy should not take effect, unless the petitioner should continue with the executrix all that time. There is nothing in the will to prove either suggestion.

¶4 The decree below, dismissing the- petition, is reversed, a-nd the case retained for further directions, and an account ordered.

Per Curiam.

¶5 Decree reversed.

/48/nc/552 · .json · Public domain