Legal Opinion
Farkas v. Farkas
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided July 2, 1946No. 15510PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Jenkins, Presiding Justice.
1. “Conditions repugnant to the estate granted or to do impossible or illegal acts, or which in themselves are contrary to the policy of the law, are void.” Code, § 85-903.
2. Under the Code section just quoted, a devise in fee with an inhibition against alienation is repugnant to the fee, and is therefore void. Freeman v. Phillips, 113 Ga. 589 (38 S. E. 943); Crumpler v. Barfield, 114 Ga. 570 (40 S. E. 808); Stamey v. McGinnis, 145 Ga. 226, 227 (2) (88 S. E. 935).(a) The same rule obtains, that is, an inhibition to sell a life estate is void, where such inhibition…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Moss v. ChappellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Atlanta Consolidated Street Railway Co. v. JacksonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- City of Barnesville v. StaffordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Wadley Lumber Co. v. LottSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Richmond Cotton Oil Co. v. CastellawSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Floyd v. HooverCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Wills v. PierceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1951
- Dyer v. DyerSupreme Court of Georgia · 2002
- Farkas v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1948
- Statham v. KellySupreme Court of Georgia · 2003
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.