Opinion
Filed 3 May, 1950.
Executors and Administrators 24 — A valid contract compromising a family dispute over the validity of a will and providing for the distribution of the estate in a manner other than that specified in the will, is enforcible in equity under the doctrine of family settlements and when all persons having any interest in the estate are parties to the contract and are sui juris, it is a valid contract enforceable at law.
APPEAL by the defendants, Charles W. Bundy, Guardian ad litem, and American Trust Company, Trustee under the will of Baxter Ross Hunter, from Crisp, Special Judge, at the March Term, 1950, of the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County.
Orr Hovis for plaintiffs, appellees.
Charles W. Bundy for the defendant, Charles W. Bundy, Guardian ad litem, appellant.
Henry E. Fisher for the defendant, American Trust Company, Trustee under the will of Baxter Ross Hunter, appellant.
The plaintiffs sued the defendants to enforce a contract made in December, 1949, compromising a family dispute over the validity of the will of the late Baxter Ross Hunter of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and providing for the distribution of his estate among all persons having any claim thereto in a manner other than that specified in the will. The parties waived trial by jury. After hearing the evidence, the court made detailed findings of fact and appropriate conclusions of law, and entered judgment thereon approving and enforcing the contract. The defendants, Charles W. Bundy, Guardian ad litem, and American Trust Company, Trustee under the will of Baxter Ross Hunter, appealed, assigning errors.
The trial court rightly ruled that the infant, Frances Anne Thomson, and the unborn child or children of the plaintiff, Nina Hunter Thomson, have no interest whatever in the estate of Baxter Ross Hunter. The judgment finds full support in decisions upholding family settlements. Bohannon v. Trotman, 214 N.C. 706, 200 S.E. 852; Trust Co. v. Wade, 211 N.C. 27, 188 S.E. 611; Reynolds v. Reynolds, 208 N.C. 578, 182 S.E. 341; Spencer v. McCleneghan, 202 N.C. 662, 163 S.E. 753; Tise v. Hicks, 191 N.C. 609, 132 S.E. 560; Bailey v. Wilson, 21 N.C. 182.
Moreover, it is proper even apart from the doctrine of family settlements; for it appears that the contract was made in good faith to settle a dispute between the parties as to the validity of the will of the testator; that all persons having any interest in the estate are parties to the contract; and that all of such persons are sui juris. 57 Am. Jur., Wills, section 995. For these reasons, the judgment is
Affirmed.