{
  "id": 8526204,
  "name": "MARGARET E. POTEAT v. SHELIA ROBINSON, Administratrix for the Estate of HUBRA BEDFORD LEA",
  "name_abbreviation": "Poteat v. Robinson",
  "decision_date": "1988-07-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 8817SC66",
  "first_page": "764",
  "last_page": "766",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "90 N.C. App. 764"
    }
  ],
  "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": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 29-19",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 248,
    "char_count": 3710,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.812,
    "sha256": "dd6d5d172f2ac95acab143798a15f88e8394b2f9e78c6a725a4bd9054f571568",
    "simhash": "1:0d6a7304512f86e6",
    "word_count": 610
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:55:12.261630+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Becton and Phillips concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "MARGARET E. POTEAT v. SHELIA ROBINSON, Administratrix for the Estate of HUBRA BEDFORD LEA"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "WELLS, Judge.\nThe sole question presented by this appeal is whether G.S. \u00a7 28A-19-16 is applicable to plaintiffs action.\nOn 24 June 1983 Hubra Bedford Lea died intestate, and Shelia Robinson, defendant herein, was appointed the ad-ministratrix of his estate. The plaintiff wrote a letter to defendant\u2019s agent within six months after the date of first publication of notice to creditors stating that she was an heir of the deceased and wished to share in the distribution of his estate. By written letter dated and mailed to plaintiff on 31 July 1984 the defendant, by her agent, rejected plaintiffs claim. In its order dismissing plaintiffs claim the trial court concluded that since the plaintiff did not commence an action until 22 December 1986, a date more than three months after written notice of rejection had been communicated, G.S. \u00a7 28A-19-16 applies and bars plaintiffs claim.\nG.S. \u00a7 28A-19-16 provides as follows:\nDisputed claim not referred barred in three months. If a claim is presented to and rejected by the personal representative or collector, and not referred as provided in G.S. 28A-19-15, the claimant must, within three months, after due notice in writing of such rejection, or after some part of the claim becomes due, commence an action for the recovery thereof, or be forever barred from maintaining an action ther\u00e9on.\nPlaintiff contends that G.S. \u00a7 28A-19-16 applies to creditors\u2019 claims against an estate and not to the interests of heirs. We agree. The cases construing article 19 of chapter 28A involve actions by creditors to recover debts. Moreover, N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 28A-19-3(h) expressly provides that the word \u201cclaim\u201d as used in article 19 \u201cdoes not apply to claims of heirs or devisees to their respective shares or interests in the decedent\u2019s estate in their capacity as such heirs or devisees.\u201d Thus, it was error for the trial court to dismiss plaintiffs claim on the basis that it was barred by G.S. \u00a7 28A-19-16.\nFor the reasons stated the judgment of the trial court must be and is\nReversed.\nJudges Becton and Phillips concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WELLS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Dawson, Watkins & Hardy, by Christopher T. Watkins, for plaintiff-appellant.",
      "W. Osmond Smith, III for defendant-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MARGARET E. POTEAT v. SHELIA ROBINSON, Administratrix for the Estate of HUBRA BEDFORD LEA\nNo. 8817SC66\n(Filed 19 July 1988)\nExecutors and Administrators \u00a7 19.2\u2014 illegitimate child\u2019s claim on estate \u2014 claim denied \u2014 time for filing action\nThe trial court erred in dismissing plaintiffs action claiming a share in decedent\u2019s estate on the ground that it was barred by N.C.G.S. \u00a7 28A-19-16 because it was filed more than three months after the claim had been rejected by decedent\u2019s personal representative, since that statute applies only to creditor\u2019s claims against an estate and not to the interests of heirs.\nAPPEAL by plaintiff from Lewis, John B., Jr., Judge. Order entered 24 August 1987 in CASWELL County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 1 June 1988.\nThe plaintiff, Margaret E. Poteat, brought this action on 22 December 1986 for a share in the estate of Hubra Bedford Lea, deceased. In her complaint, plaintiff alleged that she was born illegitimately on 19 December 1949, that on or about 20 February 1950, Lea was adjudged the father of plaintiff, and that pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 29-19, she is entitled to share in Lea\u2019s estate. The defendant, Shelia Robinson, answered in apt time and moved to dismiss on the ground, inter alia, that plaintiff\u2019s right to recovery is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The trial court concluded that plaintiffs action is barred by N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 28A-19-16 and granted defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss. The plaintiff appealed.\nDawson, Watkins & Hardy, by Christopher T. Watkins, for plaintiff-appellant.\nW. Osmond Smith, III for defendant-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0764-01",
  "first_page_order": 794,
  "last_page_order": 796
}
