Carson v. Searcy
Supreme Court of Georgia
Wills. Evidence. Before F. D. DlSMUKE, ESQ., Judge pro hac vice. Spalding Superior Court. August Term, 1880. Searcy, executor, filed his bill for direction in construing the will of Searcy, deceased. The point was whether the legatees mentioned in the 5th item were those mentioned in the 4th item, only, or included, also, those mentioned in the 3rd item. These items were as follows: Item j>d.
Read the full summary
Wills. Evidence. Before F. D. DlSMUKE, ESQ., Judge pro hac vice. Spalding Superior Court. August Term, 1880. Searcy, executor, filed his bill for direction in construing the will of Searcy, deceased. The point was whether the legatees mentioned in the 5th item were those mentioned in the 4th item, only, or included, also, those mentioned in the 3rd item. These items were as follows: Item j>d. Should there be a balance left after the payment of all my debts, as before provided in item 2d, I give and bequeath and devise to my niece-in-law, Sally D. Carson, the sum of one hundred dollars, and to…
1Opinion of the Court
Jackson, Chief Justice.
The sole question made by this record is, whether or not there be such ambiguity in the testator’s will as authorized the introduction of parol evidence to fix his meaning, or whether the will, as written, be free from all ambiguity, and explains itself and fixes the intention of the testator without invoking the aid of evidence .outside of the writing.
The fifth item provides that the proceeds of ‘the property in dispute “ be equally divided among the legatees already named share and share alike.” Those legatees “already named” are three nephews, whose names,are in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Billingslea v. MooreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
3Cited by1 opinion
- Williams v. WhitehurstSupreme Court of Georgia · 1968