Schriber v. Anderson

53 S.E.2d 490, 205 Ga. 343, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 362
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 12, 1949
Docket16613.
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 53 S.E.2d 490 (Schriber v. Anderson) 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
Schriber v. Anderson, 53 S.E.2d 490, 205 Ga. 343, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 362 (Ga. 1949).

Opinion

Head, Justice.

1. “The presumption that one who makes a will intends to dispose of all his property and not die intestate as to any part of his estate is overcome only when a contrary intention is plain and unambiguous, or'necessarily implied.” Armstrong v. Merts, 202 Ga. 483 (4) (43 S. E. 2d, 512).

2. The provision of the will of the testatrix, that “the remaining assets of my estate of whatever kind and nature . . I hereby give, bequeath and devise to my stepson, Willie Witte,” upon the death of the testatrix conveyed a vested remainder interest to Willie Witte in the residue of the estate. Code, § 85-703.

3. A will takes effect upon the death of the maker. One who is named as the beneficiary of a life estate may also take a remainder interest. The fact that the life tenant could not enjoy the estate in remainder, because the remainder interest would not be distributed until the death of the life tenant, does not prevent a vested title in the remainder interest, which might be sold and conveyed by the remainderman, or devised to, or be inherited by, his heirs, who would take a vested remainder interest. Payne v. Brown, 164 Ga. 175 (137 S. E. 921); Lumpkin v. Patterson, 170 Ga. 94 (152 S. E. 448).

4. The trial court properly ruled that the estate in remainder passed -to Willie Witte upon the death of Mrs. Kate Witte, and that Mrs. Florence Witte, as administratrix of the estate of her husband, Willie Witte, was the proper person to whom the residue of the estate should be delivered.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. *344 R. L. Maynard and A. M. Zellner, for plaintiff in error. TI. B. Williams, R. L. LeSueur, and Nick J. Falsone, contra.

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

Related

Candies v. Hulsey
593 S.E.2d 353 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Wisse v. Anderson
219 S.E.2d 393 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1975)
Trammell v. Elliott
199 S.E.2d 194 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1973)
Johnston v. Duncan
180 S.E.2d 348 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1971)
Lewis v. Mitchell
117 S.E.2d 901 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Harper v. Fuller
102 S.E.2d 553 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1958)
Johnson v. Johnson
99 S.E.2d 827 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1957)
McDonald v. Suarez
93 S.E.2d 16 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 S.E.2d 490, 205 Ga. 343, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schriber-v-anderson-ga-1949.