Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 N.C. 341

Helme v. . Guy

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 5, 1818

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1818-07-05

From Johnston. petition for partition. — The petitioners set forth that ■William Guy bad died seised of divers tracts of land, leaving the Defendant and the wife of the petitioner his only children and heirs at law ; and that by his last will, William Guy bad directed the said tracts to be equally, divided between the Defendant and the wife of the petitioner, and prayed a division.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1794

1 state decisions

Cited in Bouvier (1914)’s definition of “Appurtenances”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1818-07-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Seaw ERR, Judge,

¶1 delivered the opinion of a majority of the Court:

¶2 From all the circumstances of this case, it seems impossible to doubt about the meaning of the testator. He liad a large body of land composed of different tracts, and know'll by different names, the one he lived on was called the Ben Radcliffe tract,” and he devises the tract on which he lived to his son William Henry, together with all the appurtenances.

¶3 Had lie said, the lands,” on which lie lived, there might have been doubt •, but we are clear, that according to the manner in which lie has expressed himself, the devise extends no further than to that distinct tract; and the word appurtenances” can have no other or greater meaning, than to comprehend things in the nature of incidents to this tract. There must be a decree for partition.

/6/nc/341 · .json · Public domain