Legal Opinion
Ivey v. Davis
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided August 16, 1932No. 8686PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEusssell, C. J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) In construing a will the prime essential rule, paramount and controlling, is to ascertain the intention of the testator and to give complete effect thereto. As sententiously said by Mr. Justice McCay in Gibion v. Gibbon, 40 Ga. 562, 577, “it is in fact making a mil for a man, to give to his words a meaning they did not have at the time they were written.” Another rule as to the construction of wills (which was adopted for the purpose of aiding us in ascertaining the real intention of the testator as to disposition of his property after his death) is that…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Cushman v. ColemanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Harris v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1921
- White v. RowlandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881
- Burton v. PattonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Watson v. AdamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Armstrong v. MertsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
- Gilmore v. GilmoreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
- Hungerford v. Trust Co. of GeorgiaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Jack M. Thornton, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of John F. Scarborough, Jr., Bankrupt v. John F. Scarborough, Jr., BankruptCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
- Refinance Corp. v. WilsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1936
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.