Murphy v. Murphy

Supreme Court of Georgia

Murphy v. Murphy

107 S.E. 37, 151 Ga. 438, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 281

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 15, 1921

DocketNo. 2201

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 107 S.E. 37 (Murphy v. Murphy) 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

Murphy v. Murphy, 107 S.E. 37, 151 Ga. 438, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 281 (Ga. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. The persons who, under the deed in question, were to take remainder interests not being certain until the death of the life-tenant, the remainder interests were contingent, and could not become vested until the death of the life-tenant. Darnell v. Barton, 75 Ga. 377.

2. The words “representatives of such children, if any,” as used in the deed, mean children of deceased children of the life-tenant, and do not include the wife of a child who predeceased the life-tenqnt, leaving no children. See Cushman v. Coleman, 92 Ga. 772 (2), 774 (19 S. E. 46); Civil Code (1910), § 3660.

3. Applying the above rulings to the facts alleged in the petition, the court erred in overruling the demurrer.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. Claude Bond and C. M. McClure, for plaintiffs in error. Goode & Owen and James H. & Emmett Shelton, eontrá.

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