N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 39
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-1.1 (2026)

In construing conveyances court shall give effect to intent of the parties

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 39 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In construing a conveyance executed after January 1, 1968, in which there are inconsistent clauses, the courts shall determine the effect of the instrument on the basis of the intent of the parties as it appears from all of the provisions of the instrument.

(b) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall not prevent the application of the rule in Shelley's case. (1967, c. 1182.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1976–2024 · leading case: Whetsell v. Jernigan, 229 S.E.2d 183 (N.C. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Whetsell v. Jernigan, 229 S.E.2d 183 (N.C. 1976). · cites it 18× “However, by the adoption of G.S. 39-1.1, the legislators, in their wisdom, provided that the existing law only be changed as to conveyances executed after 1 January 1968.”
Mason-Reel v. Simpson, 397 S.E.2d 755 (N.C. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 13× “pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 39-1.1. The deed in controversy was typed, i.”
Runyon v. Paley, 416 S.E.2d 177 (N.C. 1992). · cites it 3× “1991); see also N.C.G.S. § 39-1.1 (1984). Ordinarily, the parties’ intent must be ascertained from the deed or other instrument creating the restriction.”
Metcalf v. Black Dog Realty, LLC, 684 S.E.2d 709 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-1.1 (a) (2007). However, in construing deeds executed before 1 January 1968, the common law rules of deed construction apply to determine the intent of the parties.”
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Schmitt, 823 S.E.2d 396 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “" N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 39-1.1 (2017). Our General Assembly also instructed that the determination shall be made by "the courts" as it has been done historically.”
Johnson v. Burrow, 256 S.E.2d 811 (N.C. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 5× “In one deed the named consideration was paid by “the party of the second part”.”
Frye v. Arrington, 292 S.E.2d 772 (N.C. Ct. App. 1982). “At the outset, we note that G.S. 39-1.1 is inapplicable to the present action.”
Robertson v. Hunsinger, 512 S.E.2d 480 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-1.1 (a) (1984) states, “In construing a conveyance executed after January 1, 1968, in which there are inconsistent clauses, the courts shall determine the effect of the instrument on the basis of the intent of the parties as it appears from all of the…”
Belk v. Comm'r, 2013 T.C. Memo. 154 (Tax Ct. 2013). · cites it 3× “Petitioners, citing N.C. Gen. Stat. sec. 39-1.1 (2011), argue that we erred in applying the general rules of contract construction.”
Robinson v. King, 314 S.E.2d 768 (N.C. Ct. App. 1984). “The current governing rule is as follows: In construing a conveyance executed after January 1, 1968, in which there are inconsistent clauses, the courts shall *90 determine the effect of the instrument on the basis of the intent of the parties as it appears from all of the…”
Gamble v. Williams, 251 S.E.2d 625 (N.C. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “) In Whetsell , the Supreme Court thoroughly analyzed existing case law as well as G.S. 39-1.1 enacted by the 1967 General Assembly.”
Bost v. Brown (N.C. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 11× “” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-1.1 (a) (2023); see also Robertson v.”
Show all 22 citing cases →
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 39-1.1(a) — 2 cases
Neeley v. Fields (N.C. Ct. App. 2022).
Neeley v. Fields (N.C. Ct. App. 2022).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.