Legal Opinion · Dissent

Usry v. Farr

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 1, 2001No. S01A0784Published

1DissentCarley, Justice

The law of Georgia favors the early vesting of remainders “in all cases of doubt,” but not where “a manifest intention to the contrary shall appear.” OCGA § 44-6-66. “[T]his preference for vested interests is only a presumption and will give way to a clear intent to make the interest subject to a contingency.” Verner F. Chaffin, Studies in the Georgia Law of Decedents’ Estates and Future Interests, p. 332 (1978). Because the controlling terms of Watson Usry’s will leave no doubt of his clear intent that his grandchildren must survive their parents to inherit, their remainders are contingent…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Crawley v. KendrickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  2. Britt v. FincherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
  3. Miller v. BrownSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959
  4. Witcher v. WitcherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1973
  5. Houston v. CoramSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API