Legal Opinion

Winston v. Jones

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 15, 1844PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Error to the Chancery Court óf Franklin. The bill was filed by the plaintiff in error, and alleges, that he became the purchaser of a tract ofland in Franklin county, containing seven hundred acres, at a sale at public auction, in January, 1837, by the defendants in error, as executors of Arthur Jones, deceased, for which he agreed to pay twenty-one thousand seven hundred and . eighty dollars, in two instalments, for which he executed two notes, and received from the…

Read the full summary

Error to the Chancery Court óf Franklin. The bill was filed by the plaintiff in error, and alleges, that he became the purchaser of a tract ofland in Franklin county, containing seven hundred acres, at a sale at public auction, in January, 1837, by the defendants in error, as executors of Arthur Jones, deceased, for which he agreed to pay twenty-one thousand seven hundred and . eighty dollars, in two instalments, for which he executed two notes, and received from the defendants in error, at the time, the following bond fpr title. Know all men by these presents, that we, John W. Jones and…

1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.

The principal question in the cause, the power of the executors under the will to sell the lands of the testator for the purpose of distribution, is one of some difficulty, depending upon the construction of an inartificial and badly drawn will.

No precise form of words is necessary to the creation of a power; if the intention to confer the power is apparent, to enable the executor to execute the trusts of the will, the power will be implied. Thus, if land is devised to an executor for the purpose ■of paying the debts of the deceased, a power of sale will be implied. [Blatch v. Wilder, 1 Atk.…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Morgan County Nat. Bank of Decatur v. NelsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1943
  2. Harris v. IngallsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1907
  3. Walker's Heirs v. MurphySupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
  4. In re GargiuloNew York Surrogate's Court · 1929
  5. Hardeman v. HardemanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918

7 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