Bank of State v. Forney
Decision Date | 30 June 1842 |
Citation | 37 N.C. 181,2 Ired.Eq. 181 |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Parties | BANK OF THE STATE et al v. THOMAS J. FORNEY et al. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
A devise to executors to hold certain property and its proceeds, until the testator's six sons should become free from debt, and when that event occurred, to make a division among them, or set off to each respectively his proportion of the property as he became free from debt, does not convey such an interest to the sons as enables them to dispose of the property, or such as to subject it to the claims of creditors, before the event, on the occurrence of which they are to take possession of the property, shall have first happened.
This bill was filed at the Fall Term, 1841, of Burke Court of Equity in the name of the Bank of the State of North Carolina, and Isaac T. Avery agent of the Bank against the defendants. To this bill answers were filed and replications thereto entered. At the Spring Term, 1842, the cause was set for hearing upon the bill and answers, and ordered to be transmitted to the Supreme Court.
The questions submitted by the pleadings are fully set forth in the opinion delivered in this court.
Badger, J. H. Bryan and D. F. Caldwell for the plaintiffs .
W. J. Alexander and J. G. Bynum for the defendants .
Jacob Forney died in the latter part of 1840, having previously made his will, bearing date the 11th day of January of that year. He therein first gave to his wife sundry slaves and other things absolutely; and then one third part of his lands and sundry other slaves for her life. The will then proceeds: “My will is, that all the balance of my property shall be divided equally amongst my ten children and their heirs; the amount they have hitherto severally received to be estimated as a part of their shares.” The testator then specifies the value of the advancement to each child; for which he or she should account in the division. Then follow the clauses following: The testator then appointed several persons his executors. In 1837, the two sons, Thomas and Albert, obtained a loan of $6,000, from the agency of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McIlvaine v. Smith
...Hobhouse, 2 Meriv. 482; Bradley v. Peixoto, 3 Ves. 325; Graves v. Dolphin, 1 Sim. 66; Shee v. Hale, 13 Ves. 404 and note; Bank of the State v. Forney, 2 Ired. Eq. 181; Snowden v. Dales, 6 Sim. 524. IV. The forfeiture must be equal to the entire estate; otherwise it is a mere clog on the pro......
-
Ashe v. Hale
...his debts then existing, and then in trust to convey it to the husband. The case is, therefore, directly within that of Bank of the State v. Forney, 2 Ired. Eq. 181. The bill charges that he died very much in debt and without any property, unless he had a title under his son's will. It does......
-
Muller v. Cox
...If, on the contrary, the rights of the debtor are contingent and the fund may never be enjoyed by him, the rule is otherwise. Bank v. Forney, 37 N. C. 181. I have been unable to find any authority directly in point, and shall determine this question in the manner it has been attacked by cou......