Legal Opinion

Tate v. Tate

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 18, 1925No. 4735Published

1Opinion

ON REHEARING.

Hines, J.

The motion for a rehearing is based upon the fact that we overlooked the principle of law announced in the' second headnote and in the second- division of the opinion in the case of Payne v. Rosser, 53 Ga. 662. After rightly recognizing the principle that the contingent interests of executory devisees are transmissible to their heirs, where the contingency is not as to the person, but as to the event upon the happening of which such interests are to fall into possession, this court announced this common-law doctrine, to wit: “That such interests did not descend to and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Oliver v. PowellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  2. Payne v. RosserSupreme Court of Georgia · 1875
  3. Thompson v. SandfordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
  4. Anderson v. BurneySupreme Court of Georgia · 1917

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

Powered by the Exa API