Skinner v. Wynne
| Decision Date | 31 December 1854 |
| Citation | 2 Jones 41,55 N.C. 41 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | JOSEPH H. SKINNER AND ANOTHER v. JOSEPH H. WYNNE AND H. G. SPRUILL, ADM'R. |
Where the two daughters of an intestate die in the life-time of their father, the one leaving two children and the other one, distribution must be made of his estate among these grand children per capita.
Grand children taking, in their own right, are not chargeable with advancements made to their deceased parents.
APPEAL from the Court of Equity of Tyrrel County.
Joseph Halsey died in the year____, leaving two grand children, Joseph Halsey Skinner and Sarah Halsey Skinner, infant children of his deceased daughter Anne, and another grand child, Joseph Halsey Wynne, infant child of his deceased daughter Sarah.
Both the daughters of Mr. Halsey, died in the life time of their father, leaving husbands surviving them, but he had no other children, nor any descendants of such besides the three grand children mentioned above.
Mr. Halsey, during the life of his daughter, Mrs. Skinner, put into her husbands possession several slaves without any written conveyance, which the husband sold and made use of the money, without rendering an account therefor.
He also, without writing, put into the possession of Mr. and Mrs. Wynne, one negro slave which he sold and made use of the money, without accounting for the same.
The bill is filed by the two children of Mrs. Skinner against the administrator of their grand father, and against the other grand child of J. H. Wynne, praying an account and distribution of the estate. The bill alleges that there were no debts but those which have been paid off, and there is no reason for the administrator's keeping the property in his hands any longer. It prays that distribution be made per capita.
The answer of the administrator admits the facts above set forth, but says that two years have not yet elapsed since he administered, and that he ought not to be decreed to account before the end of that period. As to the mode of distribution, and the other questions arising out of the estate, he submits them to the Court.
The defendant, Joseph H. Wynne, answers by his guardian, Mr. Simmons, and commends his interests and rights to the protection of the Court. The cause was set for hearing on the bill and answers, and his Honor decreed that distribution be made per capita, and that an account be taken by the master. From which decree the defendant, J. H. Wynne, appealed to the Supreme Court.
Upon the argument in this Court, two points were made for the defendant, Wynne: first, that in right of his mother, he was entitled to one half of the personal estate of his grandfather.
2nd. That the advancements to their fathers, should be accounted for in the distribution, and a proportionate deduction made.
Gilliam for plaintiff .
Heath, for defendant .
Joseph Halsey died in the year ____, intestate, and administration on his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Everett Waddey Co v. Richmond Typographical Union No. 90
...1905, § 132) and the uniform construction put upon it by our court require that the fund shall be distributed per capita. Skinner v. Wynne, 55 N. C. 41, Representation in this kind of property, when allowed, is only resorted to when it is necessary to bring the claimants to equality of posi......
-
In re Poindexter's Estate
...degree; and (2) if one who, if living, would be kin in equal degree with survivors, those who represent him shall take his share. Skinner v. Wynne, supra; Ellis v. supra; Nixon v. Nixon, supra. The second provision of the statute permitting representatives to take is only resorted to when i......
-
In Re Poindexter's Estate.
...court. Ellis v. Harrison, 140 N.C. 444, 53 S.E. 299; In re Estate of Mizzelle, supra; Nixon v. Nixon, 215 N.C. 377, 1 S.E.2d 828; Skinner v. Wynne, 55 N.C. 41; Nelson v. Blue, 63 N.C. 659. The appellants contend, however, that the nephews and nieces are related in equal degree and that as t......
-
In re Mizzelle's Estate
...[§ 137(5), supra]), and the uniform construction put upon it by our court require that the fund shall be distributed per capita. Skinner v. Wynne, 55 N.C. 41. Representation in kind of property, when allowed, is only resorted to when it is necessary to bring the claimants to equality of pos......