Taylor v. Rapp

Mobley, Justice.

Plaintiff in error contends that Item III of the will constitutes an “in terrorem” clause which would render the will nugatory.

We cannot agree with that contention as it is clear that the clause in question is not an “in terrorem” clause.

Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th ed., pp. 901, 902, defines “in terrorem” as follows: “In terror or warning; by way of threat. Applied to legacies given upon condition that the recipient shall not dispute the validity or the dispositions of the will.” See Cohen v. Reisman, 203 Ga. 684 (4) (48 SE2d 113).

Even if the clause were an in terrorem clause,…