{
  "id": 2221280,
  "name": "J. W. ALLEN et al. v. EULA ALLEN et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Allen v. Allen",
  "decision_date": "1936-03-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "744",
  "last_page": "745",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 N.C. 744"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "183 N. C. 207",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655811
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/183/0207-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "75 S. E., 1010",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "160 N. C., 256",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11271092
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/160/0256-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "127 S. E., 426",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "189 N. C., 476",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654471
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/189/0476-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "147 S. E., 680",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "197 N. C., 40",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8626924
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/197/0040-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "141 S. E., 480",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "195 N. C., 8",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627423
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/195/0008-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "136 S. E., 879",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "193 N. C., 278",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2217727
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/193/0278-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "80 S. E., 424",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "164 N. C., 56",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656343
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/164/0056-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 S. E., 82",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "149 N. C., 358",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11270661
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/149/0358-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 250,
    "char_count": 2933,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.512,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.8032205579291644e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8369941645246499
    },
    "sha256": "256565364005a1b4ab15988114b6a19f0ca2cdce7a7096645461f83d385d7801",
    "simhash": "1:a66185701839d616",
    "word_count": 524
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:34:31.527681+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. W. ALLEN et al. v. EULA ALLEN et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, O. J.\nIt is provided by C. S., 3315, that deeds of gift \u201cshall within two years after the making thereof be proved in due form and registered, or otherwise shall be void.\u201d It is conceded that if the delivery in escrow completed the \u201cmaking\u201d of said deeds, they were not registered within two years thereafter. The. defendants say delivery was not complete, \u00bfnd registration by them not possible, until said deeds actually came into their possession. This position prevailed below.\nThe position of the defendants, however appealing, overlooks the effect of a delivery in escrow and the terms of the statute. 18 C. J., 208. \u201cWhere a deed is deposited as an escrow to take effect upon the death of the grantor, the general rule is that the deed is immediately operative as against the grantor.\u201d 21 C. J., 889; Fortune v. Hunt, 149 N. C., 358, 63 S. E., 82; Buchanan v. Clark, 164 N. C., 56, 80 S. E., 424.\nThe deeds of the defendants being deeds of gift, and admittedly not registered \u201cwithin two years after the making thereof,\u201d are void under the terms of the statute, C. S., 3315. Booth v. Hairston, 193 N. C., 278, 136 S. E., 879 (on rehearing, 195 N. C., 8, 141 S. E., 480); Reeves v. Miller, ante, 362.\nThe question of advancements, mentioned on the argument, is not presented by the appeal. Paschal v. Paschal, 197 N. C., 40, 147 S. E., 680; Lunsford v. Yarborough, 189 N. C., 476, 127 S. E., 426; Thompson v. Smith, 160 N. C., 256, 75 S. E., 1010; Nobles v. Davenport, 183 N. C. 207; 1 Am. Jur. 715.\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, O. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "G. F. Burns, Hastings & Booe, Peyton B. Abbott, and Richmond Rucker for plaintiffs.",
      "Avalon E. Hall for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. W. ALLEN et al. v. EULA ALLEN et al.\n(Filed 18 March, 1936.)\nDeeds B ar\u2014\nDeeds of gift executed and delivered by the grantors in escrow and therefore not registered by the grantees within two years thereafter, are void under the terms of the statute, O. S., 3315.\nAppeal by plaintiffs from Phillips, J., at December Term, 1935, of Yadkin.\nCivil action to remove cloud from title, i.e., to declare deeds of gift void, and to have plaintiffs and defendants declared tenants in common of certain lands.\nThe facts are these:\n1. On 20 April, 1928, T. W. Allen and wife decided to divide their lands among their children.\n2. Plaintiffs were given a deed for the \u201cMartin Place,\u201d which their mother owned, and they went into immediate possession.\n3. Deeds for other lands (here in controversy) were duly executed to the defendants and delivered to J. N. Davis, son-in-law of grantors, \u201cto be by him held in escrow until after the death of the grantors and then to be delivered to the grantees.\u201d\n4. T. W. Allen died 11 January, 1935, his wife having predeceased him, and on 14 January, 1935, J. N. Davis delivered the deeds in question to defendants, grantees therein, who caused them to be registered.\nFrom judgment upholding validity of deeds to defendants, the plaintiffs appeal, assigning errors.\nG. F. Burns, Hastings & Booe, Peyton B. Abbott, and Richmond Rucker for plaintiffs.\nAvalon E. Hall for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0744-01",
  "first_page_order": 806,
  "last_page_order": 807
}