{
  "id": 8681647,
  "name": "JOSEPH P. TIMBERLAKE AND OTHERS vs. SAMUEL HARRIS & AL.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Timberlake v. Harris",
  "decision_date": "1851-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "188",
  "last_page": "190",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "7 Ired. Eq. 188"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "42 N.C. 188"
    }
  ],
  "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": 273,
    "char_count": 4099,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.462,
    "sha256": "20c1fe30d5815dfe23d76c38269c92d75bb14c279a576e2dc12e889fb2941b8a",
    "simhash": "1:c95582106e2270df",
    "word_count": 731
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:41:16.136784+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOSEPH P. TIMBERLAKE AND OTHERS vs. SAMUEL HARRIS & AL."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pearson, J.\nThe will of Drury Jones has this clause : \u201cItem 13: I give and bequeath to the heirs of Samuel Jones, six hundred dollars.\u201d' Samuel Jones is living, and,' of course, has no heirs \u2014 \u201c nemo est heaves vivsntis and' the question is, what did the testator mean ?\nHe says : \u201c Item 1 : 1 giro to Julius and Algernon Joiner,. sons of William II. Joiner, five hundred dollars each > and in \u201c item 7, I give to the seven children of Julius Tim--berlake, dec\u2019d, two hundred dollars each.\u201d\nThe general rule is, that a will or other writing cannot be added to, varied, or explained by parol evidence, but must speak for itself. In fitting the description to the person or thing, of course parol evidence must be resorted to; as, if a deed says, \u201c beginning at a black oak and running thence, &c.,\u201d what black oak, must be determined by parol evidence. So, if a will says, \u201cI give to my nephew John,\u201d what individual was meant, must be determined by parol evidence; or \u201c I give my white horse,\u201d what horse was meant, must be determined in the same way. So, if a testator says, I give to the \u201c captain,\u201d who was meant by this soubriquet or nick-name must be ascertained by proving, that he was in the habit of calling a certain person \u201c captain.\u201d\nIn our case, the difficulty is not in fitting the description'' to the person or thing, but in ascertaining what the de. scription means. What did he mean by the heirs of Samuel Jones ? Taken literally, Samuel Jones had n& heirs,1 because he was alive. Admitting it to be competent to prove, by way of explanation, that the testator knew, that\u2019 Samuel Jones was alive, can any one say, what he meant by \u201cthe heirs of Samuel Jones ?\u201d In speaking-of.the Tim-.1 berlakes, he says, \u201c the children of Julius Timberlake dec\u2019d,\u201d and in speaking of the Joiners, he says, \u201cthe sons of William H. Joiner.\u201d We-cannot suppose, that by the words,\u25a0\u00ab \u201c heirs of Samuel Jones,\u201d he meant the children of Jones for, if so, why did he not say \u201cchildren,\u201d as he had done in reference to the Timberlakes. Ho must have, had some reason for varying the expression.. . At all events, we'.-are n\u00f3t at liberty to depart from the proper meaning of the word \u201c heirs,\u201d and give to it the same meaning as to the word \u201cchildren,\u201d which the testator had just before used.\nIt may be, he meant by the word \u201c heirs,\u201d to include the children and grandchildren, or the descendants of Samuel Jones. We cannot say \u2014 and are obliged to declare, that we are unable to say, what the testator meant; and the legacy is void for vagueness and uncertainty.\nThe will must be construed as if item 13 were stricken out. There is no other difficulty suggested.\nPer Curiam. Decree accordingly.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pearson, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Busbee, for the plaintiff.",
      "B. F. Moore, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOSEPH P. TIMBERLAKE AND OTHERS vs. SAMUEL HARRIS & AL.\nA testator by he will gaye and bequeathed 11 to,the heirs of S. G. six hunched dollars.5* In another clause of bis will he gave to A. and B., \u201c sons of W . five hundred dollars each,\u201d and, in ano\u00edlier-cfausc, to the seven children of G. T. two hundred dollars each.\u201d S. G. is still living.\nHeld, that the bequest *( to the heirs\u201d of T. G. was void for vagueness and uncertainty. \u2018 '\nCause removed to the Supi-eme Court, by consent of the parties, from the Court of Equity of Franklin Couniy,. at the Fall Term 1850.\nDrury Jones died in January 1847, having made his last will and testament, which was duly admitted to probate.\u2014 The only clauses of the will, material in this suit, were the following: 1st., I give and bequeath to Julius Sidney and Algernon Joyner, sons of William H. Joyner, live hundred dollars each, &c.\u201d \u201c 3rd, I give and bequeath to Sarah\nAnn Baker, daughter of Kemp, two hundred dollars. 4th, I give and bequeath to William Jones, son of Benjamin, two hundred dollars. 7th, I give and bequeath to the seven children'of Julius Timberlake dec., two,hundred dollars each. 13th, I give and bequeath to the heirs of Samuel Jones six hundred dollars\nThe. question submitted by the pleadings in this case, was whether the bequest to the heirs of Samuel Jones was or was not valid.\nBusbee, for the plaintiff.\nB. F. Moore, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0188-01",
  "first_page_order": 198,
  "last_page_order": 200
}