Virginia Trust Co. v. White

Stacy, C. J. The question for decision is whether a widow’s dower is to be computed on the basis of the encumbered real estate of which her husband died seized, as well as of the unencumbered. The authorities answer in the affirmative. Chemical Co. v. Walston, 187 N. C., 817, 128 S. E., 196, and cases there cited. The judgment below accords with the substantive law on the subject. It is well established that in determining the present value of dower, inchoate (Blower Co. v. MacKenzie, 197 N. C., 152, 147 S. E., 829) or consummate (Caroon v. Cooper, 63 N. C., 386), the full value of the dowable lands, encumbered as well as unencumbered, and without deducting the mortgage debt, constitutes the basis of computation. Creecy v. Pearce, 69 N. C., 67; Gwathmey v. Pearce, 74 N. C., 398; Ashew v. Askew, 103 N. C., 285, 9 S. E., 646. The basis of computation of dower is unaffected by the rights of creditors, secured or unsecured. Gore v. Townsend, 105 N. C., 228, 11 S. E., 160; Overton v. Hinton, 123 N. C., 1, 31 S. E., 285. "We are not now concerned with how the rights of creditors, devisees and legatees are to be worked out. Chemical Co. v. Walston, supra. While not presently germane, as “any objection to the manner of the trial by the court below” has been specifically withdrawn, it may not be amiss to observe generally that in dealing with procedural questions in matters of this kind, what was said in the case of Griffin v. Griffin, 191 N. C., 227, 131 S. E., 585, should not be overlooked. The record, as amended by stipulation, presents no exceptive assignment of error which can be sustained. The judgment will be upheld. Affirmed.