Snellings v. Downer
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Jenkins, Justice.
“When called upon to construe a will, the court may hear parol evidence of the circumstances surrounding the testator at the time of its execution; so the court may hear parol evidence to explain all ambiguities, both latent and patent.” Code, § 113-807. But if the terms of a will when legally construed are plain and unambiguous, parol evidence can not be received for the purpose of showing an intention contrary to that which the language when properly construed necessitates. Erwin v. Smith, 95 Ga. 699 (22 S. E. 712); Hill v. Hill, 161 Ga. 356, 359 (130 S. E. 575), and cit.;…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Wright v. . WrightNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Gray's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Corbett v. SkaggsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1922
- West v. WestIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- Dresel v. KingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Kimbrough v. DickinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
- In Re Estate Of Florence Voelzel Kerr, A/K/A Florence V. Kerr, Deceased. Ralph L. Atchison, Administrator, C.T.A.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
- McLeod v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1946
- Capers v. CampSupreme Court of Georgia · 1979
- Gilmore v. GilmoreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.