{
  "id": 8525094,
  "name": "PENNIE D. BLALOCK, Administratrix of the Estate of JOSIE DANDELAKE, Plaintiff v. LUCEAL S. DANDELAKE, Defendant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Blalock v. Dandelake",
  "decision_date": "1988-06-07",
  "docket_number": "No. 8810DC23",
  "first_page": "461",
  "last_page": "462",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "90 N.C. App. 461"
    }
  ],
  "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": "221 S.E. 2d 316",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "289 N.C. 260",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8567883
      ],
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/289/0260-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 200,
    "char_count": 2859,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.769,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20554653958589864
    },
    "sha256": "2ebfcc424516994f8522e270b1889aff0a0d33ef3bede7cca020e6c8c824912e",
    "simhash": "1:96ed1034052fbcfb",
    "word_count": 461
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:55:12.261630+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Johnson and Smith concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "PENNIE D. BLALOCK, Administratrix of the Estate of JOSIE DANDELAKE, Plaintiff v. LUCEAL S. DANDELAKE, Defendant"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PHILLIPS, Judge.\nThis dispute is over the ownership of a gold and diamond brooch, which at one time was the property of Josie Dandelake, who died 5 January 1963. Plaintiff administratrix, a stepdaughter of Josie Dandelake, brought this action on 28 August 1985 alleging that the brooch was the sole asset of Josie Dandelake\u2019s estate and that it was bequeathed to her and her sisters by Josie Dande-lake\u2019s holographic will executed 17 August 1960. Defendant, the widow of plaintiffs deceased brother, Charles Dandelake, alleges that Josie Dandelake gave the brooch to her and her husband in 1962, that it has been in her or her husband\u2019s possession since 1960, and that in any event plaintiffs action is barred by the statute of limitations and laches. In the trial to Judge Hamilton without a jury plaintiffs testimony, assuming it is sufficient to identify the brooch, indicated that it was given to defendant\u2019s husband for safekeeping, while defendant\u2019s testimony was to the effect that the gift was unqualified. Plaintiff also testified that she had the purported will in her personal possession for twenty-one years following Josie Dandelake\u2019s death before offering it for probate in 1984. There was also evidence that though plaintiff filed a claim against the estate of Charles Dandelake for the brooch in 1984 and the claim was immediately denied, she did not pursue the claim further. Following the trial Judge Hamilton entered judgment for defendant upon findings and conclusions that Josie Dandelake gave the brooch to defendant\u2019s husband in 1960, the estate therefore has no interest in the brooch, and the claim is barred by laches and G.S. 28A-19-16.\nContrary to plaintiffs contention, the trial court\u2019s finding that Josie Dandelake gave the brooch to defendant\u2019s late husband is supported by competent evidence and we are bound thereby. Whitaker v. Earnhardt, 289 N.C. 260, 221 S.E. 2d 316 (1976). Since this finding and the conclusion based upon it is dispositive of the appeal, we need not determine whether plaintiffs claim is barred by G.S. 28A-19-16 and laches, as Judge Hamilton also concluded.\nAffirmed.\nJudges Johnson and Smith concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PHILLIPS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "David R. Cockman for plaintiff appellant.",
      "Philip C. Shaw for defendant appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "PENNIE D. BLALOCK, Administratrix of the Estate of JOSIE DANDELAKE, Plaintiff v. LUCEAL S. DANDELAKE, Defendant\nNo. 8810DC23\n(Filed 7 June 1988)\nGifts \u00a7 1\u2014 gold and diamond brooch \u2014 gift\u2014evidence sufficient\nIn an action to determine ownership of a gold and diamond brooch, the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court\u2019s finding that the brooch was given to defendant\u2019s late husband and that the estate administered by plaintiff had no interest in the brooch.\nAPPEAL by plaintiff from Hamilton, Judge. Judgment entered 21 September 1987 in District Court, WAKE County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 5 May 1988.\nDavid R. Cockman for plaintiff appellant.\nPhilip C. Shaw for defendant appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0461-01",
  "first_page_order": 491,
  "last_page_order": 492
}
