{ "id": 8522309, "name": "IN THE MATTER OF THE WILL OF MARIA KERR JONES", "name_abbreviation": "In re the Will of Jones", "decision_date": "1983-05-17", "docket_number": "No. 824SC606", "first_page": "325", "last_page": "327", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "62 N.C. App. 325" } ], "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": [ { "cite": "139 S.E. 2d 588", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1965, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "263 N.C. 411", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8570307 ], "year": 1965, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/263/0411-01" ] }, { "cite": "47 S.E. 2d 488", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1948, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "492-493", "parenthetical": "citation omitted" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "229 N.C. 8", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 12164471 ], "year": 1948, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "13", "parenthetical": "citation omitted" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/229/0008-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 224, "char_count": 3585, "ocr_confidence": 0.803, "pagerank": { "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08, "percentile": 0.20550561055876232 }, "sha256": "e40d1f1966afb16bcc2bf03a39bc2a73b0de63201f082ec32de490a548dd3415", "simhash": "1:7693400c3ca9148b", "word_count": 605 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:59.213578+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "Chief Judge VAUGHN and Judge Arnold concur." ], "parties": [ "IN THE MATTER OF THE WILL OF MARIA KERR JONES" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "HEDRICK, Judge.\nIn In Re Will of Puett, 229 N.C. 8, 13, 47 S.E. 2d 488, 492-493 (1948) (citation omitted), our Supreme Court held:\n[W]here a will has been duly probated, the record affords conclusive evidence of its validity, until vacated by appeal, or declared void by a court of competent jurisdiction in a proceeding instituted for that purpose, and that the offer of proof of a will alleged to have been subsequently executed, without more, is not a direct but a collateral attack on the validity of the will. It is only by a caveat or proceeding in that nature that the validity of a properly probated will, and one without \u2018inherent or fatal defect appearing on its face\u2019 . . . may be brought in question.\nSee also In Re Will of Charles, 263 N.C. 411, 139 S.E. 2d 588 (1965). In the present case, the trial court correctly allowed the respondent\u2019s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition with prejudice. The petition discloses on its face an insurmountable bar to the relief sought.\nThe record discloses that the Last Will and Testament of Maria Kerr Jones, dated 14 December 1967 with a codicil attached and dated 18 February 1970, has been probated in common form. The petition in the present case asking that a paper writing dated 13 October 1977 be probated in solemn form as a second codicil, does not constitute a caveat proceeding to the will of Maria Kerr Jones, dated 14 December 1967 and already probated in common form.\nAffirmed.\nChief Judge VAUGHN and Judge Arnold concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "HEDRICK, Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Joseph B. Chambliss for the petitioners, appellants.", "Rose, Rand, Ray, Winfrey & Gregory, by Ronald E. Winfrey for the respondent, appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "IN THE MATTER OF THE WILL OF MARIA KERR JONES\nNo. 824SC606\n(Filed 17 May 1983)\nWills \u00a7 9.4\u2014 probate of will \u2014 later attempted probate of codicil as collateral attack\nWhere the last will of the testatrix dated 14 December 1967 with a codicil dated 18 February 1980 had been probated in common form, petitioners\u2019 attempt in May 1981 to have a paper writing dated 13 October 1977 admitted to probate in solemn form as a second codicil constituted an impermissible collateral attack on the validity of the probated will.\nAPPEAL by petitioners from Bruce, Judge. Judgment entered 25 February 1982 in Superior Court, SAMPSON County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 20 April 1983.\nThis is a civil action wherein the petitioners sought to have admitted to probate in \u201csolemn form\u201d a paper writing purporting to be a holographic \u201ccodicil to the Last Will and Testament of Maria Kerr Jones, deceased,\u201d allegedly probated in common form on 2 November 1978.\nThe record before us discloses the following uncontroverted facts: (1) Maria Kerr Jones died in Sampson County on 30 October 1978; (2) A paper writing purporting to be her Last Will and Testament, executed on 14 December 1967 with an attached codicil dated 18 February 1970, was admitted to probate in common form by the Clerk of Superior Court in Sampson County on 2 November 1978; (3) The petitioners filed a petition on 21 May 1981 in the office of the Clerk of Superior Court, Sampson County seeking to have a holographic \u201csecond codicil\u201d allegedly dated 13 October 1977 admitted to probate in solemn form; (4) On 24 February 1982 the respondent filed a motion for summary judgment and on 25 February 1982 the petitioners filed a counter-motion for summary judgment; (5) On 25 February 1982 Judge Bruce entered an order denying petitioners\u2019 motion for summary judgment, allowing the respondent\u2019s motion for summary judgment and dismissing the petition with prejudice. Petitioners appealed.\nJoseph B. Chambliss for the petitioners, appellants.\nRose, Rand, Ray, Winfrey & Gregory, by Ronald E. Winfrey for the respondent, appellee." }, "file_name": "0325-01", "first_page_order": 357, "last_page_order": 359 }