Wilkes County NcArchives Court.....Brown, Vs. Brown 1811-18
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarchives.net/nc/ncfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Deb Haines http://www.genrecords.net/emailregistry/vols/00003.html#0000719 June 13, 2008, 12:03 am

Source: North Carolina Reports
Written: 1811-18

JULY TERM, 1818.

BROWN v. BROWN. 

From Wilkes.

The persons who are introduced to establish a nuncupative will must have been 
specially called on by the testator to bear witness to what he was saying. 
Where the words uttered were drawn from the testator by the person interested 
to establish them as a will, they will not constitute a food nuncupative will.

This was a petition filed for a distributive share of the estate of James 
Brown, deceased, to which defendant answered, claiming the property by virtue 
of a nuncupative will.

It appeared from the record of Wilkes County Court, which made part of the 
case, that the court had directed to be recorded as a nuncupative will certain 
affidavits, which were as follows:

State of North Carolina, 25 August, 1814. Wilkes County.

This day came John N. Green before me and made oath in due form of law and 
saith that on Saturday, the day before James Brown died, the said Brown was in 
a low state of health, but in his senses, and was asked in his presence by 
Leannah Chapman what he wanted to be done with his property if he should die. 
His reply was, for her to do with it as she pleased.

George Chapman came before me, the subscribing justice for said county, and 
made oath in due form of law, and saith that he heard James Brown say the same 
words in answer to what he was asked by Leannah Chapman: for her to do with 
his property as she pleased, as is stated in the above by Mr. Green. Sworn to, 
etc., 25 August, 1814.

James Brown died on 14 August, 1814.

Hall, J. If we were informed by the records of the County Court of Wilkes that 
the nuncupative will of James Brown had been proved in court, and we should be 
furnished with a copy of it properly authenticated, I think we would be bound 
by it; but in the present instance it seems that the County Court has admitted 
to record two affidavits which fall far short of establishing a nuncupative 
will. It is true, the record speaks of them as a nuncupative will, but that 
does not make them one. I think we cannot view them as such, although they 
have been directed to be recorded, and that the petitioner has a right to 
recover. It does not appear that James Brown specially required either of the 
witnesses to bear witness to what he was saying; the words he uttered were 
drawn from him by the person whose interest it is to establish them as a will. 
My opinion is that the petitioner should have a decree. 
Per Curiam. Judgment for the petitioner.

Cited: Haden v. Bradshaw, 60 N. C., 261; Bundrick v. Haygood, 106 N. C., 472.

Additional Comments:
North Caroline Reports, Vol. 6, Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme 
Court of North Carolina, Reported by A.D. Murphey, Annotated by Walter Clark. 
1811 to 1813, Inclusive and at July Term, 1818. Reprinted by the State. E.M. 
Uzzell and Company, State printers and binders, 1910.

File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/nc/wilkes/court/brown589gwl.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.genrecords.org/ncfiles/

File size: 3.5 Kb