Legal Opinion

Henderson v. Mack

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided November 15, 1884PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Case 62 — CONSTRUCTION OR DEED appeal from mercer circuit court. It is clear that the words of the habendum in the deed to “ Y. and his heirs and assigns, forever, with covenant of general warranty,” create a fee-simple ; but when there is added to the clause quoted, “ during his natural life,” the clauses are irreconcilable, and the latter should be rejected. (Blackstone, book 2, page 380; Washburn Real Prop., volume 3, pages 436, 437, 439; 40 Vermont, 23; Shep.

Read the full summary

Case 62 — CONSTRUCTION OR DEED appeal from mercer circuit court. It is clear that the words of the habendum in the deed to “ Y. and his heirs and assigns, forever, with covenant of general warranty,” create a fee-simple ; but when there is added to the clause quoted, “ during his natural life,” the clauses are irreconcilable, and the latter should be rejected. (Blackstone, book 2, page 380; Washburn Real Prop., volume 3, pages 436, 437, 439; 40 Vermont, 23; Shep. Touchstone,-102; Conn. Dig., 278; 42 Penn. Stat., 376.) The only rational manner of construing the deed is. that since the words…

1Opinion of the Court

JUDGE HOLT

delivered the opinion of the court.

Tlie only question presented by this appeal is, whether by the deed from J. M. Harris to James E. Young the fee-simple title to the property conveyed by it vested in him or merely a life estate with remainder to the appellee, Belle Mack.

The granting clause of the deed reads as follows, to wit: “Do hereby sell, grant and convey to the party of *380the second part, his heirs and assigns, the following described property ; ’ ’ and, save this statement, there is nothing in the premises of. the deed bearing upon the question at issue.

The habendum, however,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. M. Noyes & Co. v. NicholsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Triplett v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  2. Barnett v. BarnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Bodine's Adm'rs v. ArthurCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1890
  4. McNair & Wade Land Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Florida · 1907
  5. Jacobs v. All Persons, Etc.California Court of Appeal · 1909

20 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