{
  "id": 8630679,
  "name": "In re Will of WILLIAM SLADE",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Will of Slade",
  "decision_date": "1938-11-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "361",
  "last_page": "362",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "214 N.C. 361"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 186,
    "char_count": 2334,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.466,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6864434896390928e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6983704455356278
    },
    "sha256": "ad881d59413b7494ae9f63a1d86cc94230f7a406f053bfd7ccb917a85aac72f8",
    "simhash": "1:4ec3c98c2b4ba8ad",
    "word_count": 395
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:13.292364+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "In re Will of WILLIAM SLADE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ScheNCK, J.\nKatherine Jones, as propounder, procured the probate in common form of a paper writing purporting to be the will of \"William Slade. Augusta Wilson and others filed a caveat. The cause was transferred to the Superior Court, where issues of devisavit vel non were answered in favor of the propounder. Whereupon judgment that the paper writing propounded, and every part thereof, was the last will and testament of William Slade was entered. However, upon motion of the caveators, ruling upon which was made by consent at a later time, the trial judge, after finding that the filing of the caveat was \u201capt and proper\u201d and \u201cdone in good faith,\u201d \u201cordered that the costs of the proceeding be taxed against the estate, which costs shall include an allowance of $130.00 to counsel who represented the caveators in the trial.\u201d To this order the propounder reserved exception and appealed to the Supreme Court.\nThe taxing of the costs against the estate is authorized by C. S., 1244, which reads: \u201cCosts in the following matters shall be taxed against either party, or apportioned among the parties, in the discretion of the court: . . . (2) Caveats to wills . . .\u201d\nThe inclusion of attorneys\u2019 fees in the costs is authorized by ch. 143, Public Acts 1937, which reads: \u201cSection 1. That the word 'costs\u2019 as the same appears and is used in section twelve hundred and forty-four of the Consolidated Statutes shall be construed to include reasonable attorneys\u2019 fees in such amounts as the court shall in its discretion determine and allow.\u201d It will he noted that the statute does not limit the attorneys\u2019 fees included to those of the attorneys for the party who prevails.\nThe judgment below is\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "ScheNCK, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. H. Lee and L. I. Moore for caveators, appellees.",
      "Ward & Ward and B. O\u2019Hara for propounder, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "In re Will of WILLIAM SLADE.\n(Filed 2 November, 1938.)\nWills \u00a7 29 \u2014 Court may tax costs against estate in unsuccessful caveat proceedings.\nEven tbougb judgment is entered in favor of propounders, tbe trial court may tax tbe costs, including an allowance to counsel representing caveators, against tbe estate upon finding that tbe filing of tbe caveat was apt and proper and done in good faitb. C. S., 1244; Public Laws of 1937, cb. 143, see. 1.\nAppeal by tbe propounder from Grady, J., at May Term, 1938, of CeaveN.\nAffirmed.\nW. H. Lee and L. I. Moore for caveators, appellees.\nWard & Ward and B. O\u2019Hara for propounder, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0361-01",
  "first_page_order": 429,
  "last_page_order": 430
}