Williams v. Cotten
| Decision Date | 31 December 1857 |
| Citation | 3 Jones 395,56 N.C. 395 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | JOHN J. WILLIAMS and others v. FRED'K. K. COTTEN, Executor. |
*1 Where specific and pecuniary legacies were given absolutely, by will, with executory bequests over upon specified contingencies, all that the executor is required to do is to deliver the property to the first taker (he giving a receipt). He has no right to exact a bond for the security of the ulterior claimants, but they must look to the protective aid of the court to secure them from loss by removal, waste or destruction, as the case may arise.
CAUSE removed from the Court of Equity of Wake county.
Margaret G. Cotten, died in the county of Wake, on 5th of December, 1855, having executed her last will and testament. By the will aforesaid, she bequeathed to Frederick K. Cotten a negro slave by the name of Prince, and to Eliza H. Thompson, a negro woman named Sabina and all her children, except Prince. She then bequeaths as follows:
“5th. All the residue of my estate, I give in the following manner, viz: To my son Frederick K. Cotten, one share; to my grand-daughter, Eliza H. Thompson, one share; to my four grand-children, viz., Margaret E. Cotten, Arabella C. Cotten, Florida C. Cotten and John W. Cotten, one share. Frederick and Eliza accounting for the negroes given them above.
6th. Should Eliza H. Thompson die without issue, that is, a child or children, then, and in that case, I give all the property bequeathed to her above, of every description, to my son Frederick K. Cotten, one share or one half, and to Margaret E. Cotten, Arabella C. Cotten, Florida C. Cotten and John W. Cotten, one share or the other half.
7th. Should one or more of the children of my son, John W. Cotten, viz., Margaret E. Cotten, Arabella C. Cotten, Florida C. Cotten and John W. Cotten, die without issue, then, and in that case, all the property bequeathed to them above, to be divided between the survivors. Should all die without issue, then, and in that case, I give all the property bequeathed to them above, to my son Frederick K. Cotten and my grand-daughter E. H. Thompson.”
The defendant, Frederick K. Cotten, was appointed executor in the said will, and was qualified and undertook the discharge of that office. The bill alleges that a large amount of personalty came to the hands of the executor, and prays for an account and settlement among the legatees. The above named Eliza H. Thompson, had intermarried with the plaintiff, J. J. Williams, and Margaret E. Cotten with the plaintiff Joseph A. Engelhard, before the filing of the bill; Arabella C. Cotten, Florida C. Cotten and J. W. Cotten, are infants, and sue by their mother and next friend, Mrs. Laura Cotten.
The defendant answered, admitting the facts stated in the bill, and professing a readiness to pay over the above legacies, under a decree of the court of equity; but he doubts whether it would be safe for him to pay the principal of the fund, which is chiefly money, to the primary legatees, or whether he should only pay the interest, and he asks to be advised by the Court, in regard to his duty in this particular. He states, that for the purpose of satisfying all the legatees, and for the purpose of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Finlayson v. CABARRUS BANK & TRUST COMPANY
...Spruill v. Moore, 40 N.C. 284; Jones v. Simmons, 42 N.C. 178; Braswell v. Morehead, 45 N.C. 26; Hall v. Robinson, 56 N.C. 348; Williams v. Cotten, 56 N.C. 395; Baker v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., supra 173 N.C. 365, 92 S.E. 170, L.R.A.1917E, 266; Ernul v. Ernul, 191 N.C. 347, 132 S.E. "Whe......
-
Woodard v. Clark
...Spruill v. Moore, 40 N.C. 284; Jones v. Simmons, 42 N.C. 178; Braswell v. Morehead, 45 N.C. 26; Hall v. Robinson, 56 N.C. 348; Williams v. Cotten, 56 N.C. 395; Baker v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., supra; Ernul v. Ernul, 191 N.C. 347, 132 S.E. When such future interest is created by will it ......
-
Bryan v. Harper
...upon her remaining unmarried until the youngest child becomes 21, and falls directly within these authorities. The case of Williams v. Cotten, 56 N. C. 395, which contains expressions seemingly at variance with the decision in Braswell v. Morehead, is considered and distinguished in Ritch v......
-
In re Knowles' Estate
...gift is that Mrs. Ashburn may be supported by the use of the property." The same conclusion was reached for the same reason in Williams v. Cotten, 56 N.C. 395. In Chambers v. Bumpass, 72 N.C. 429, the bequest "all of the residue of my estate," etc. Pearson, C.J., finds in this language "the......