Wade v. Russell

Supreme Court of Georgia

Wade v. Russell

17 Ga. 425

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 15, 1855

DocketNo. 70

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 17 Ga. 425 (Wade v. Russell) 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

Wade v. Russell, 17 Ga. 425 (Ga. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Benning, J.

delivering the opinion.

Whatever kind of estate it was, which the testator intended' to create in the daughters, he intended to create it in them, whether they ever married or not. This is clear. And therefore, it cannot be said, that he intended only a separate estate in them. Such an estate could only exist in them, in case they married. Indeed, the words of the will are as suitable to-the creation of estates in sons as in daughters.

[1.] And it is well settled, that to defeat the marital right,, the intention to create a separate estate in the wife must be unequivocal. (Hill on Trustees, 421.) And in this, the intention to create a separate estate cannot be said to be unequivocal.

So we think the non-suit should not be disturbed.

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

By the Court.

Benning, J.

delivering the opinion.

Whatever kind of estate it was, which the testator intended' to create in the daughters, he intended to create it in them, whether they ever married or not. This is clear. And therefore, it cannot be said, that he intended only a separate estate in them. Such an estate could only exist in them, in case they married. Indeed, the words of the will are as suitable to-the creation of estates in sons as in daughters.

[1.] And it is well settled, that to defeat the marital right,, the intention to create a separate estate in the wife must be unequivocal. (Hill on Trustees, 421.) And in this, the intention to create a separate estate cannot be said to be unequivocal.

So we think the non-suit should not be disturbed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Ga. 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wade-v-russell-ga-1855.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack