Opinion · Nclaw North Carolina

HELME v. GUY, 6 N.C. 341 (1818)

6 N.C. 341

Type
Opinion
Court
Nclaw North Carolina
Jurisdiction
Nclaw
Date
1818-01-01
Topic
general

HELME v. GUY, 6 N.C. 341 (1818) HELME AND OTHERS v. GUY.Supreme Court of North Carolina July Term, 1818. From Johnston. Where a testator owned a large body of land, composed of several tracts, acquired at different times and known by different names, and living on one of the tracts known by a distinct name, devised in these words, "I give and bequeath to my son, W.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed HELME v. GUY, 6 N.C. 341 (1818). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

HELMEv. GUY,6 N.C. 341(1818)
HELME AND OTHERS v. GUY.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
July Term, 1818.
From Johnston.
Where a testator owned a large body of land, composed of several tracts, acquired at different times and known by different names, and living on one of the tracts known by a distinct name, devised in these words, "I give and bequeath to my son, W. H. G., the tract of landwhereon I nowlive, including the plantation, together with all theappurtenancesthereunto belonging,"it was heldthat he had devised to W. H. G. only the tract on which he lived; the wordappurtenancescomprehended only things in the nature ofincidentsto that tract. Had testator said thelandson which he lived, the construction might have been different.
PETITION for partition. The petitioners set forth that William Guy had died seized of divers tracts of land, leaving the defendant and the wife of the petitioner his only children and heirs at law; and that by his last will William Guy had directed the said tracts to be equally divided between the defendant and the wife of the petitioner, and prayed a division.
The answer denied that the will had directed such a (342) division of the lands, and the clause in question was in the following words:

"Item: I give and bequeath to my son, William Henry Guy, the tract of landwhereon I now live, including the plantation, together with all theappurtenancesthereunto belonging." After giving to his son several negroes, he thus proceeds: "The residue of my property to be equally divided between my son, William Henry Guy, and my daughter, Ann Eliza Helme."

It appeared that the testator was possessed of many tracts of land, acquired at different times and composing a large body, and lived on a tract which was called "the Ben. Radcliffe tract"; many of the other tracts had also names by which they were distinguished.
SEAWELL, J.
From all the circumstances of this case it seems impossible to doubt about the meaning of the testator. He had a large body of land composed of different tracts, and known by different names. The one he levied on was called the "Ben. Radcliffe tract," and he devises thetracton whichhelivedto his son, William Henry, together with all theappurtenances.

Had he said "the lands" on which he lived, there might have been doubt; but we are clear that, according to the manner in which hehasexpressed himself, the devise extends no further than to that distinct tract; and the word "appurtenances" can have no other or greater meaning than to comprehend things in the nature ofincidentsto this tract. There must be a decree for partition.Page 250

(343)