{
  "id": 8553119,
  "name": "IN THE MATTER OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF ROBY A. BRACKETT",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re The Last Will & Testament of Brackett",
  "decision_date": "1972-08-02",
  "docket_number": "No. 7229SC549",
  "first_page": "601",
  "last_page": "602",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "15 N.C. App. 601"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 169,
    "char_count": 2120,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "sha256": "848ee279f420dd00b322c2ff9ad1a1cd707d1cddbdb635b1ab83aa2daa214084",
    "simhash": "1:58fad05850821a44",
    "word_count": 352
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:26:51.335715+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Parker and Graham concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "IN THE MATTER OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF ROBY A. BRACKETT"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "VAUGHN, Judge.\nThe validity of the attack on the deed of separation depends upon whether the wife\u2019s acknowledgment, coming as it does under the provisions of G.S. 52-6, complies with that section in substantially the form required by G.S. 47-39. The acknowledgment is as follows:\n\u201cState of North Carolina County of Rutherford\nI, Monroe Holland, a Justice of the Peace of said county, do hereby certify that Beatrice Brackett personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing deed of separation.\nAnd I do further certify that it has been made to appear to my satisfaction and I do find as a fact, that the said Beatrice Brackett freely executed the said deed of separation and freely consented thereto at the time of her separate examination and that the same is not unreasonable or injurious to her.\nWitness my hand and seal, this the 30 day of Nov., 1967.\n(Seal) Monroe Holland Justice of the Peace\u201d\nWe hold that the acknowledgment is sufficient to meet the requirements of the statute. Entry of judgment declaring the deed of separation invalid constituted error.\nReversed.\nJudges Parker and Graham concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "VAUGHN, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Harry K. Boucher for Beatrice Brackett, widow.",
      "George R. Morrow for the estate of Roby A. Brackett."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IN THE MATTER OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF ROBY A. BRACKETT\nNo. 7229SC549\n(Filed 2 August 1972)\nHusband and Wife \u00a7 10 \u2014 validity of separation agreement \u2014 acknowledgment by wife\nTrial judge erred in holding a deed of separation invalid where the wife\u2019s acknowledgment of the deed complied substantially with statutory requirements. G.S. 47-39.\nAppeal by the executrix of the estate of Roby A. Brackett from Falls, Judge, 17 April 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Rutherford County.\nBeatrice Brackett and Roby A. Brackett entered into a deed of separation on 27 November 1967. Roby Brackett died in 1970 leaving a will in which all of his property was devised to his children.\nBeatrice Brackett attempted to dissent. Counsel stipulated that her right to dissent depends upon the validity of the deed of separation. Judge Falls held the deed of separation invalid.\nHarry K. Boucher for Beatrice Brackett, widow.\nGeorge R. Morrow for the estate of Roby A. Brackett."
  },
  "file_name": "0601-01",
  "first_page_order": 625,
  "last_page_order": 626
}