Forrest v. Jennings
This text of 92 S.E. 189 (Forrest v. Jennings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
This is an action against the estate of Rosanna Parkman by creditors of the estate of W. L. Parkman. Mrs. Parkman left her will in due form, and the will is in the following words, which raise the questions to be determined by the Court:
“Second. I will, devise and bequeath unto my beloved husband, W. R. Parkman, all my property, real and personal and mixed, that I may own at the time of my death, wherever the same may be situate, for his use, behoof and benefit forever, without any limitation or restrictions of any kind whatever.
“Third. In the event that my said husband, W. R. Parkman, shall die seised and possessed of property received from my estate without having made provisions as to who shall receive the same or leaving no specific directions as to what shall be done therewith, I will and devise and bequeath the same unto my nephew, Tom Brown Jennings.”
The case was tried before Judge Sease on the agreed facts, and the question was:
“Did the will of Mrs. Parkman cover the debts contracted by her husband ?”
Judge Sease found that the will covered the debts contracted by the husband, Parkman. From this decree of his Honor the appellant appeals, and alleges error and asks *120 reversal. The' appeal raises the sole question: Was his Honor in error in so holding? We think his Honor was in error.
Judgment reversed, and case remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent -with the views herein announced.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
92 S.E. 189, 107 S.C. 117, 1917 S.C. LEXIS 86, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forrest-v-jennings-sc-1917.