Legal Opinion

Love v. McManus

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 10, 1951No. 17598PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hawkins, Justice.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) While the intention of a testator cannot be given effect if contrary to express enactments of the legislature or positive rules of property (Wright v. Hill, 140 Ga. 554, 79 S. E. 546; Lester v. Stephens, 113 Ga. 495, 499, 39 S. E. 109; Hertz v. Abrahams, 110 Ga. 707, 36 S. E. 409; Thompson v. Sanders, 118 Ga. 928, 930, 45 S. E. 715; Stringfellow v. Harmon, 207 Ga. 62, 60 S. E. 2d, 139)—in the construction of a will the cardinal rule is that the intention of the testator should be the first and great object of inquiry, and this is to be…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Cushman v. ColemanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
  2. Hertz v. AbrahamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  3. Cook v. WeaverSupreme Court of Georgia · 1852
  4. Woodbery v. Atlas Realty Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1919
  5. Clark v. BakerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lanier v. LanierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
  2. Barfield v. AikenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
  3. Barnes v. NationsBank, N.A.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1996
  4. Lanier v. LanierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API