{
  "id": 11275302,
  "name": "J. D. LOCKMAN et al. v. M. D. HOBBS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lockman v. Hobbs",
  "decision_date": "1887-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "541",
  "last_page": "545",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "98 N.C. 541"
    }
  ],
  "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": 429,
    "char_count": 8102,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.4033266686372354e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3406538373472739
    },
    "sha256": "22f988f7cdf5bea35c0444ce7c00c86002cca242f33657e8392879855e136f85",
    "simhash": "1:38b3eb2ec65aeecd",
    "word_count": 1464
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:51:55.485321+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. D. LOCKMAN et al. v. M. D. HOBBS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Smith, C. J.,\n(after stating the case). . The only point presented in the appeal, as will be thus seen, is as to the legal effect of the 8th and 11th clauses construed in connection, and in whom, among the contesting claimants, the equitable estate in the land therein described is vested.\nWe do not find any difficulty in arriving at the intention of the testatrix in the devise, and it is different from that deduced by the Judge, from the words employed to express it.\n1. \u201cThe lawfully-begotten heirs of her body\u201d refer most obviously to the children of the devisee for life, Belza A. James, of whom there were only two, and this without the aid of the Act of 1856, which declares that a limitation \u201cto the heirs of a living person\u201d shall be construed to mean \u201cthe children of such person, unless .a contrary intention appear by the deed or will.\u201d Rev. Code, ch. 41, \u00a75.\nSo far from the indication of a different intent, found in other provisions of the will, that put upon the expression by the statute is shown to have been in the mind of the testatrix by the use of the same words in the clause next preceding, when, in directing the manner of apportioning the shares among the legatees, she says, \u201c each child share and share alike,\u201d thus defining the meaning of the term, \u201cheirs of her body,\u201d used just before.\n2. The limitation to the tw*> children then living wrhen the will took effect vested in them a present estate in remainder, which, except for clause 11th, would have been in fee, and but for the devise over, which reduces it to an estate in each for life, while it left not less a vested remainder in each for life, and terminating at his and her death. The life estate in the mother, however, continued, notwithstanding that the intervening estate in her children was, by their deaths in her life-time put out of the way of the ultimate remainder given in the 11th clause to the trustee, the defendant, Middleton D. Hobbs, for his own use when the said Belza A. should die.\nThe contingency, when this last remainder in fee was to rest in possession, having occurred \u2014 a contingency not attaching to the estate itself, but to the time of its enjoyment only, the defendant became the owner of the equitable as he had been of the legal estate, and this was thus freed from the trusts for others.\nThere is, therefore, error in the ruling that the plaintiffs were entitled to the equitable estate held by the defendant upon the trusts declared in the will, upon the death of said Belza A., and that he is accountable for the rents since accruing, and it must be reversed and the order of reference so amended as to strike out an inquiry as to such.\nError.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Smith, C. J.,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "No counsel for the plaintiffs.",
      "Messrs. M. L. MeCorkle and R. F. Armfield, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. D. LOCKMAN et al. v. M. D. HOBBS.\nDemse \u2014 \u201c Children \u201d \u2014 Remainder.\n8 devised lands to D as trustee for B, \u201c to her use during her natural life ; after her decease to the use of the lawful begotten heirs of her body, each one to share and share alike. * * * In case of the death of B and all her children, all the property willed to her to revert to my nephew\u201d (the trustee). At the death of the testator, B had'two children living, both of whom, however, died before B, one of them leaving children, who survived her: Held, that upon B\u2019s death the entire estate became vested in the nephew.\nThis is a civil action, heard by MacRae, Judge, upon a case agreed at Pall Term, 1887, of the Superior Court of Lincoln county.\nThe controversy between the parties to the action arises out of the will of Mahala Sherrill, who died in the year 1863, and is as to the proper construction of certain clauses contained in it. These clauses are as follows:\nItem 7th. I give and bequeath unto Middleton D. IPobbs, as trustee, for the use of Belza A valine James, one negro man named Allen, and one girl named Catherine, one negro girl named Mary Jane, one negro girl named Little Catha-rine \u2014 during her natural life, and after decease to the use of the lawful begotten heirs of her body, each child share and share alike.\nItem 8th. I give and bequeath unto Middleton D. Hobbs, as trustee, for the use of Belza A. James, all my lands lying below the line running from the High Shoals and Ball\u2019s Creek, on which my house stands, to her use during her natural life; after her decease to the use of the lawful begotten heirs of her body, each one to share and share alike.\nItem 9th. I give and bequeath to Mahala Elenora James \u2022one bed and furniture.\nItem 10th. ^ give and bequeath unto Middleton D. Hobbs, .as trustee, for the use of Belza A. James, the rest of my beds not disposed of, also the one half of my household and kitchen furniture.\nItem 11th. I give and bequeath to Logan Wilson and Middleton D. Hobbs, as trustees, for the use of Elizabeth M. Wilson and Belza A. James, my wheat-threshing machine\u2014 each one half of it. In case of the death of Belza A. James and all her children, all the property willed to her revert to my nephew, Middleton D. Hobbs.\nThe cause was submitted to the Court upon a \u201c case .agreed,\u201d the material facts whereof, in connection with the \u25a0construction of the will, are thus stated:\n\u201c 3d. It is further agreed, that at the time of the execution \u25a0of said last will and testament and at the death of the testatrix, Belza A. James had only two children living and never had any others; that these two children were Nora James, who intermarried with the plaintiff J. D. Lockman, and died in the life-time of her mother, Belza A. James, to-wit, in July, 1883, leaving her surviving only two children, who were the plaintiffs, Mandy Lockman and William Lock-man ; and the other child of Belza A. James was a son of A. \u25a0G-. James, who died intestate and leaving no wife or child in the life-time of his mother, Belza A. James, to-wit, in August, 1883, but leaving him, the said A. G. James, two children of his sister, to-wit, said Mandy and William Lockman, him surviving, and that the plaintiff J. D. Lockman is his administrator and also is administrator of Belza A. James, who died in February, 1887, and also administrator of said Nora Lockman, deceased.\n\u201c 4th. It is further agreed that the defendant, Middleton D. Hobbs, entered upon and exercised his office as trustee for said Belza A. James, up to the time of her death, and took into his possession the personal property given in trust for her, and exercised control over the real estate so given in trust for her, and that he was a nephew of the testatrix, Mahala Sherrill, and that Belza A. James was her niece.\nThese facts herein stated- and agreed upon as the material .facts necessary for the construction of the will of Mahala Sherrill as to defendant M. E>. Llobbs\u2019 claim thereunder, which is, that he is entitled to the property bequeathed and devised to Belza A. James at the date of her death as here-inbefore'stated; which property is also claimed by plaintiffs under said will, \u2014 this agreement is made without prejudice to any of the other claims and charges made in plaintiffs\u2019 complaint, or as to other facts therein alleged.\u201d\nThereupon was entered the following judgment:\n\u201cIt is adjudged that under the will of Mahala Sherrill, deceased, the property therein and thereby bequeathed and devised to M. D. Hobbs, in trust for Belza. A. James, at the death of said Belza A. James belongs to the plaintiffs, Manda Lockman and William Lockman, and that said property so devised and bequeathed does not revert to the defendant, M. D. Hobbs; and therefore, on motion of plaintiffs, it is ordered further that this cause be and the same is hereby referred to C. E. Childs, clerk of this Court, to take and state an account as to all matters in controversy between the parties, as the same are set forth in the pleadings, and he make due report of his findings of fact and of his conclusions of law separately, as required by the Code of Civil Procedure. And it is further ordered that the referee do also take and state an account of the rents and profits that have accrued since the death of Belza A. James.\u201d\nFrom this judgment the defendant appealed.\nNo counsel for the plaintiffs.\nMessrs. M. L. MeCorkle and R. F. Armfield, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0541-01",
  "first_page_order": 573,
  "last_page_order": 577
}