{
  "id": 8623605,
  "name": "H. W. EARLY v. W. A. TAYLOE",
  "name_abbreviation": "Early v. Tayloe",
  "decision_date": "1941-03-26",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "363",
  "last_page": "365",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "219 N.C. 363"
    }
  ],
  "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": "97 S. E., 730",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "177 N. C., 7",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8653504
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/177/0007-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "216 N. C., 565",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8609489
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/216/0565-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "216 N. C., 702",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8611956
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/216/0702-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "18 S. E., 967",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "114 N. C., 242",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "104 S. E., 892",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "180 N. C., 369",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8653649
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/180/0369-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "139 S. E., 838",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 N. C., 411",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8610421
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/194/0411-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "143 S. E., 210",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "195 N. C., 624",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8631070
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/195/0624-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "153 S. E., 118",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "198 N. C., 661",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8617438
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/198/0661-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "115 S. E., 425",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "200 N. C., 443",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8622841
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/200/0443-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "167 S. E., 417",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "204 N. C., 672",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8623819
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/204/0672-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "12 Cal., 363",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Cal.",
      "case_ids": [
        2200611
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/cal/12/0363-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "14 Mich., 225",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mich.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "75 Atl., 859",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "A.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "226 Pa. St., 607",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Pa.",
      "case_ids": [
        967846
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/pa/226/0607-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "147 S. E., 809",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "197 N. C., 159",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627681
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/197/0159-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 369,
    "char_count": 5223,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.494,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.3915115643676283e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6428940451740622
    },
    "sha256": "2123cca0f5db35672bc72b60fe5e8b1551cb7a4ada9947e063de96831b5c3e76",
    "simhash": "1:6675cde74821d6c5",
    "word_count": 953
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:18.105136+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "H. W. EARLY v. W. A. TAYLOE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nOn the hearing, the question in difference was made to turn on the construction of a clairse in the will of Abner W. Early, late of Bertie County, this State.\nThe testator provided that after the death of his wife and the falling in of her life estate, his lands should be divided \u201cinto eight equal divisions\u201d and allotted to his children and grandchildren in equal shares, that is: . . . \u201cto my son Hufham or his children one share.\u201d\nUnder the allotment made pursuant to the testator\u2019s directions, following the death of the life tenant, the plaintiff, who is designated as Hufham in his father\u2019s will, was assigned \u201cTract No. Six (6),\u201d the lot here in controversy. Divisional deeds or cross-conveyances were also executed by the several devisees.\nAt the time the will was made and at the death of the testator, the plaintiff, Hufham W. Early, had two living children, and he now has four living children.\nIt is the contention of the plaintiff that he is the owner in fee of \u201cTract No. Six (6) of the A. W. Early Estate Lands\u201d by virtue of the division made pursuant to his father\u2019s will and the divisional or cross-deeds executed by the respective devisees.\nThe plaintiff\u2019s contention prevailed in the court below, and we approve. Tate v. Amos, 197 N. C., 159, 147 S. E., 809. The devise is \u201cto my son Hufham,\u201d with a substituted gift to \u201chis children\u201d in the event Hufham should predecease the testator. In other words, the substitution is in prospect of, and with a view to guarding against, a failure of the devise by lapse. 1 Jarman on Wills, 612; Bender v. Bender, 226 Pa. St., 607, 75 Atl., 859, 134 A. S. R., 1088. The devise \u201cto Hufham or his children\u201d means that Hufham will take if he survive the testator, and, if not, bis children will take. Ready v. Kearsley, 14 Mich., 225; Hunter v. Watson, 12 Cal., 363. See Whitley v. Arenson, ante, 121.\nIt is provided by C. S., 4162, that when real estate is devised to any person, the same shall be held and construed a devise in fee simple, unless such devise shall, in plain and express language show, or it shall be plainly intended by the will, or some part thereof, that the testator intended to convey an estate of less dignity. Jolley v. Humphries, 204 N. C., 672, 167 S. E., 417; Henderson v. Power Co., 200 N. C., 443, 115 S. E., 425; Lineberger v. Phillips, 198 N. C., 661, 153 S. E., 118; Washburn v. Biggerstaff, 195 N. C., 624, 143 S. E., 210; Barbee v. Thompson, 194 N. C., 411, 139 S. E., 838; Carroll v. Herring, 180 N. C., 369, 104 S. E., 892; Holt v. Holt, 114 N. C., 242, 18 S. E., 967.\nAn unrestricted devise of real property carries the fee. Heefner v. Thornton, 216 N. C., 702, 6 S. E. (2d), 506.\nThe testator expressed a wish or desire in item 6 of his will that his home and farm should be and remain the property of his children, grandchildren and their children and so on, \u201cand is not to be conveyed out of the family.\u201d If this be regarded as a restraint on alienation it is void, Williams v. McPherson, 216 N. C., 565, 5 S. E. (2d), 830, and if merely the expression of a desire on the part of the testator, it is likewise ineffectual. Brooks v. Griffin, 177 N. C., 7, 97 S. E., 730.\nOn the facts as presented, the judgment appears to be correct.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Tyler \u25a0& Jenhins for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Joseph B. Burden for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "H. W. EARLY v. W. A. TAYLOE.\n(Filed 26 March, 1941.)\n1. Wills \u00a7 33g\u2014\nTestator provided that after the termination of his widow\u2019s life estate his land should be divided in equal parts for allotment to his children and grandchildren, and devised \u201cto my son Hufham or his children one share.\u201d Held: The son named takes the fee, the gift to the son\u2019s children being a substituted gift to take effect only in the event that the son named should predecease the testator.\n2. Wills \u00a7 33a\u2014\nA devise of real estate will be construed to be in fee simple unless an intention to convey an estate of less dignity plainly appears from the language of the devise or from some other part of the will. O. S., 4162.\n3. Same\u2014\nAn unrestricted devise of property carries the fee.\n4. Wills \u00a7 35\u2014\nAn expression following the devise of land in fee that it \u201cis not to be conveyed out of the family\u201d is void if it be considered a restraint on alienation, and is equally ineffectual if regarded merely as an expression of desire on the part of the testator.\nAppeal by defendant from Nimocks, J., in Chambers at Fayetteville, 22 November, 1940. From Be\u00editie.\nControversy without action, submitted on an agreed statement of facts.\nPlaintiff being under contract to convey to the defendant a 607-acre tract of land, known as \u201cTract No. Six (6) of the A. W. Early Estate Lands,\u201d duly executed and tendered deed sufficient in form to invest the defendant with a fee-simple title to the property, and demanded payment of the purchase price as agreed, but the defendant declined to accept the deed and refuses to make payment of the purchase price on the ground that the title offered is defective.\nThe com-t being of opinion that upon the facts agreed, the deed tendered was sufficient to convey a fee simple title to the locus in quo, gave judgment for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appeals, assigning error.\nTyler \u25a0& Jenhins for plaintiff, appellee.\nJoseph B. Burden for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0363-01",
  "first_page_order": 405,
  "last_page_order": 407
}