Eason v. Eason

Decision Date18 September 1912
Citation75 S.E. 797,159 N.C. 539
PartiesEASON . v. EASON.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
1. Deeds (§ 93*)—Construction.

A deed will be construed so as to effectuate the intent as gathered from the entire instrument, when it can be done by any reasonable construction.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Deeds. Cent. Dig. §§ 231, 232; Dec. Dig. § 93.*]

2. Husband and Wife (§ 14*)—Conveyances —Construction—Estate Created.

Where a deed conveyed property to one and his wife, "each one-half interest, " it must be construed to create a tenancy in common, though the habendum and tenendum conveyed the property to both and their heirs and assigns.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Husband and Wife, Cent. Dig. §§ 71-89; Dec. Dig. § 14.2-*]

Appeal from Superior Court, Greene County; Justice, Judge.

Petition for dower by Florence Eason against Joseph C. Eason. From a judgment for petitioner, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Geo. M. Lindsay and J. Paul Frizzelle, for appellant.

W. F. Evans and L. I, Moore, for appellee.

BROWN, J. The plaintiff is the second wife of Nathan Eason, and as such claims dower in the whole of a certain tract of land described in a deed dated December 30, 1904, executed by Thomas Lassiter to Nathan Eason and his first wife, Carrie.

It is contended by the plaintiff that the deed in question conveys the land to Nathan Eason and his said wife Carrie jointly, and that the doctrine of survivorship, as between husband and wife, applies, inasmuch as Nathan Eason survived his first wife. Ray v. Long, 132 N. C. 895, 44 S. E. 652. The premises of the deed are as follows: "This deed, made this the 30th day of December, A. D. 1904, by Thomas U. Lassiter and his wife, Alice Lassiter, of Greene county and state of North Carolina, of the first part, to Nathan Eason and wife, Carrie G. Eason, each one-half interest, of Greene county and state of North Carolina, of the second part." It is unnecessary to set out the remainder of the deed. The habendum, as well as the tenendum, conveys the property to said Nathan and Carrie G. Eason and their heirs and assigns.

We are of opinion that in construing the deed in question the language used in the premises, to wit, "to Nathan Eason and wife, Carrie G. Eason, each one-half interest, " should be taken into consideration in construing the deed. We have said repeatedly in recent decisions that a deed will be construed so as to effectuate the intent as gathered from the entire instrument, when it can be done by any reasonable interpretation. Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N. C. 338, 74 S. E. 335; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N. C. 394, 63 S. E. 79, 24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 514; Gudger v. White, 141 N. C. 513, 54 S. E. 386.

Giving the language quoted its ordinary significance, we are of opinion the deed created a tenancy in common, and that the plaintiff is entitled to dower in only one-half of the land described in the petition. The langauge used is too plain to admit of discussion as to its meaning. The evident purpose of the draftsmen was to convey one...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Moore v. Greenville Banking & Trust Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • September 24, 1919
    ... ... and the conveyance so worded, that they will be decreed to ... hold as tenants in common, and not by the entirety. Eason ... v. Eason, 159 N.C. 539, 75 S.E. 797; Highsmith v ... Page, 158 N.C. 226, 73 S.E. 998; Stalcup v ... Stalcup, 137 N.C. 305, 49 S.E. 210; ... ...
  • Willis v. Mutual Loan & Trust Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 5, 1922
    ... ... construed as meaningless. Springs v. Hopkins, 171 ... N.C. 486, 88 S.E. 774; Jones v. Sandlin, 160 N.C ... 155, 75 S.E. 1075; Eason v. Eason, 159 N.C. 540, 75 ... S.E. 797; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337, 74 S.E ... 335; Real Estate Co. v. Bland, 152 N.C. 231, 67 S.E ... 483; ... ...
  • Beacom v. Amos
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1913
    ...N. C. 175, 73 S. E. 899; High-smith v. Page, 158 N. C. 226, 73 S. E. 998; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N. C. 337, 74 S. E. 335; Eason v. Eason, 159 N. C. 539, 75 S. E. 797 —they being some of the many cases in which this practical rule was applied. In Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N. C. 321, 74 S. E.......
  • Beacom v. Amos
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1913
    ...158 N.C. 175, 73 S.E. 899; Highsmith v. Page, 158 N.C. 226, 73 S.E. 998; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337, 74 S.E. 335; Eason v. Eason, 159 N.C. 539, 75 S.E. 797 -- being some of the many cases in which this practical rule was applied. In Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321, 74 S.E. 808, we s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT