Case Name: NORMAN McWILLIAMS v. LUTHER McWILLIAMS, ARCHER McWILLIAMS, J. B. McWILLIAMS, MILTON McWILLIAMS, and MILTON McWILLIAMS and RETHA COFIELD, Executors of the Estate of BETTIE McWILLIAMS
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1943-09-29
Citations: 223 N.C. 857
Docket Number: 
Parties: NORMAN McWILLIAMS v. LUTHER McWILLIAMS, ARCHER McWILLIAMS, J. B. McWILLIAMS, MILTON McWILLIAMS, and MILTON McWILLIAMS and RETHA COFIELD, Executors of the Estate of BETTIE McWILLIAMS.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 223
Pages: 857–858

Head Matter:
NORMAN McWILLIAMS v. LUTHER McWILLIAMS, ARCHER McWILLIAMS, J. B. McWILLIAMS, MILTON McWILLIAMS, and MILTON McWILLIAMS and RETHA COFIELD, Executors of the Estate of BETTIE McWILLIAMS.
(Filed 29 September, 1943.)
Appeal by plaintiff from Williams, J., at June Term, 1943, of Halifax.
Affirmed.
P. H. Bell for plaintiff.
A. W. Andleton for defendants.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Tbe question presented by tbis appeal is whether a fund on deposit in a local bank passed under tbe will of Bettie McWil-liams, or was undevised property for distribution under tbe statute among her next of kin. An examination of tbe language in wbicb tbe will was expressed leads us to tbe conclusion that tbe residuary clause was sufficiently broad to include the fund in question, and that it passed in accordance with the twentieth item of the will to the persons therein named, in the proportions designated. There are no facts in the record to overcome the presumption that the testatrix intended to dispose of her entire estate. Case v. Biberstein, 207 N. C., 514, 177 S. E., 802; Gordon v. Ehringhaus, 190 N. C., 147, 129 S. E., 187.
Judgment affirmed.