Dickinson v. Fueller.

463 S.E.2d 127, 265 Ga. 861
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 13, 1995·No. S95A1831·Published

Opinion

Benham, Chief Justice.

This appeal by Dickinson follows the trial court’s construction of the last will and testament of Barbara J. Fueller, the appellant’s grandmother.1

In provision II of a “home-made will,” the testatrix left all of her property to her husband, defendant Roland Fueller. In provision V, the testatrix made specific disposition of certain property to others, including Dickinson’s now deceased mother. The trial court found that the testatrix gave all of her property to Fueller in fee simple and that the disposition of property under provision V was only in the event both the testatrix and Fueller died.

In construing a will, the court is required to examine it as a whole and to search diligently for the intention of the testatrix. OCGA § 53-2-91; Cole v. Robertson, 263 Ga. 149 (2) (429 SE2d 678) (1993). Upon reviewing the record in this case, we conclude that the trial court, in its interpretation of the will, examined the document as a whole and ascertained the intent of the testatrix. Accordingly, we affirm.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dickinson v. Fueller., 463 S.E.2d 127, 265 Ga. 861 (Ga. 1995).

463 S.E.2d 127 (Dickinson v. Fueller.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cole v. Robertson
429 S.E.2d 678 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1993)