Tucker v. Bellamy
Decision Date | 28 November 1887 |
Citation | 98 N.C. 31,4 S.E. 34 |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Parties | Tucker and others v. Bellamy. |
Code N. C. §1281, provides that the children of colored persons living together as man and wife, born before January 1, 1868, shall he considered legitimate, with all the rights of heirs at law and next of kin, with respect to the estates of such parents or either of them. Held that, under this provision, persons born before the time specified could not inherit from an aunt.
In North Carolina, slaves could neither legally marry, nor own or Inherit property. Plaintiffs and their aunt were slaves. In 1880 she died without issue, leaving properly. Held, that they had no such legal status in relation to her, as enabled them to inherit from her in the absence of statutory provision.
Appeal from supreme court, New Hanover county; Philips, Judge.
M. Bellamy and J. D. Bellamy, Jr., for defendant. No counsel for plaintiff.
This is a special proceeding, and the plaintiffs allege in their petition that they and the defendant are the owners, as tenants in common, of a certain lot of land therein described, they being the owners of oner half thereof, and the defendant the owner of the other half, and they demand judgment that partition thereof be made, etc. The defendant in his answer denies the allegations of the petitioners, and alleges that he is the sole owner of the land, etc.
On the trial of the issues raised by the pleadings, the jury rendered a special verdict, from which, among other things, it appears Upon these facts the court...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wilson v. Storthz
...have any inheritable blood in North Carolina. 234 U.S. 615; 11 La.Ann. 232; 23 Miss. 170; 35 Fla. 39; 48 Am. St. 238; 6 Am. Dig. 2026; 98 N.C. 31; La.Ann. 625; 183 Mass. 448. Coleman & Lewis and Miles & Wade, for appellee Miles. 1. On the question of adverse possession, the presumptions are......
-
Walker v. Tyner (In re Estate of Mcdade)
...519; Scoggins v. State, 32 Ark. 205; Andrews v. Simmons, 68 Miss. 732, 10 So. 65; Keen v. Keen, 184 Mo. 358, 83 S.W. 526; Tucker v. Bellamy, 98 N.C. 31, 4 S.E. 34; Roberson v. McCauley, 61 S.C. 411, 39 S.E. 570; Gilbert v. Edwards, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 460, 74 S.W. 959; Johnson v. Shepherd, 14......
-
In re McDade's Estate
...519; Scoggins v. State, 32 Ark. 205; Andrews v. Simmons, 68 Miss. 732, 10 So. 65; Keen v. Keen, 184 Mo. 358, 83 S.W. 526; Tucker v. Bellamy, 98 N.C. 31, 4 S.E. 34; Roberson v. McCauley, 61 S.C. 411, 39 S.E. Gilbert v. Edwards, 32 Tex.Civ.App. 460, 74 S.W. 959; Johnson v. Shepherd, 143 Ala. ......
-
Adams v. Sneed
... ... Fontenette, 25 La. Ann. 617; Andrews v ... Simmons, 68 Miss. 732, 10 So. 65; Hereford v. Rabb ... (Miss.) 19 So. 201; Tucker v. Bellamy, 98 N.C ... 31, 4 S.E. 34; Gregley v. Jackson, 38 Ark. 487 ... These views are in accordance with the decision in Daniel v ... ...