Mathews v. Blalock

Supreme Court of Georgia

Mathews v. Blalock

162 S.E. 813, 174 Ga. 379, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 54

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 12, 1932

DocketNo. 8515

StatusPublished

This text of 162 S.E. 813 (Mathews v. Blalock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mathews v. Blalock, 162 S.E. 813, 174 Ga. 379, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 54 (Ga. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. Where a testatrix devises certain real property to her several children, with the proviso that if such child or children die without leaving children, his or her share shall go to the other children, such devise conveys a defeasible fee in such property devised; and where the will further devises the right and power to each child to sell his or her share in the estate so devised, and one of such children dies, leaving children, after having exercised the power conferred by the will and sold his share, the purchaser and his transferees have a good title to such share.

2. The court did not err in overruling the demurrer to the petition, and in granting the injunction. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. H. J. Kennedy, P. J. Smith, B. B. Weatherly, and Claude Christopher, for plaintiffs in error. Dobbs & Dobbs, contra.

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

Hill, J.

1. Where a testatrix devises certain real property to her several children, with the proviso that if such child or children die without leaving children, his or her share shall go to the other children, such devise conveys a defeasible fee in such property devised; and where the will further devises the right and power to each child to sell his or her share in the estate so devised, and one of such children dies, leaving children, after having exercised the power conferred by the will and sold his share, the purchaser and his transferees have a good title to such share.

2. The court did not err in overruling the demurrer to the petition, and in granting the injunction. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. H. J. Kennedy, P. J. Smith, B. B. Weatherly, and Claude Christopher, for plaintiffs in error. Dobbs & Dobbs, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 S.E. 813, 174 Ga. 379, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mathews-v-blalock-ga-1932.