Bell v. Grant
Decision Date | 06 November 1979 |
Docket Number | No. 35275,35275 |
Parties | BELL et al. v. GRANT et al. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Robert H. Herndon, James E. Peugh, Milledgeville, for appellants.
Tom B. Benham, Atlanta, Jones, Cork, Miller & Benton, Thomas C. James, III, H. Jerome Strickland, Macon, for appellees.
Certiorari was granted to determine whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in holding that it had jurisdiction of the appeal in this case and that the intent of the testatrix was a question for a jury, rather than for the court. The facts and proceedings below insofar as relevant are stated in Grant v. Bell, 150 Ga.App. 141, 257 S.E.2d 12 (1979).
1. The Court of Appeals correctly held that it had jurisdiction of the appeal. Construction of the will was only indirectly or incidentally involved in this action for money had and received. Reece v. McCrary, 179 Ga. 812, 177 S.E. 741 (1934); Trust Co. of Ga. v. Smith, 182 Ga. 360, 185 S.E. 525 (1936); Darnell v. Tate, 208 Ga. 23, 64 S.E.2d 582 (1951); Scheridan v. Scheridan, 231 Ga. 729, 204 S.E.2d 293 (1974).
2. In the fourth division of its opinion, the Court of Appeals held that the language of the will was ambiguous as to whether or not the sisters' intentions to sell timber had to be expressed in writing and accordingly, "A jury must determine the testatrix's intent." The case of Williams v. McCoy Lumber Industries, Inc., 146 Ga.App. 380(3), 246 S.E.2d 410 (1978), is cited as supporting this holding. The Williams case stands as direct authority for the proposition that where the terms of a contract are ambiguous, the intention of the parties is a question for the jury. The rule as to the construction of wills is otherwise. "The construction of a will is for the court, and not a jury." Watts v. Finley, 187 Ga. 629(5), 1 S.E.2d 723 (1939). "The construction of a will is for the court." Armstrong v. Merts, 202 Ga. 483, 43 S.E.2d 512 (1947). The rule as to the construction of wills has been stated another way in cases involving the question of whether or not parol evidence will be heard in aid of construction: C. & S. Nat. Bank v. Kelly, 223 Ga. 294, 298, 154 S.E.2d 584, 586 (1967). May v. C. & S. Bank of LaGrange, 223 Ga. 614, 615, 157 S.E.2d 279, 280-281 (1967). Elsewhere, the rule has been stated: "Where no such...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Powell v. Thorsen
...right to the subject funds turned upon questions of law, including construction of a clause of Lura A. Lester's will. Bell v. Grant, 244 Ga. 665, 261 S.E.2d 616 (1979). Appellants accordingly were not entitled to a trial by jury on Count One of the 2. Item 5 of the will devised to Lester "a......
-
Wheatley Grading Contractors, Inc. v. DFT Investments, Inc.
... ... No. 35266 ... Supreme Court of Georgia ... Submitted Sept. 17, 1979 ... Decided Nov. 6, 1979 ... [244 Ga. 665] John C. Bell, Jr., Augusta, for appellants ... Dye, Miller, Bowen & Tucker, A. Rowland Dye, Augusta, for appellee ... [244 Ga ... In that case, this court reversed the grant of an interlocutory injunction which, in effect, required the removal of a hedgerow because that "would require appellants to provide access where ... ...
-
George v. D'Angelo
...605, 611, 224 S.E.2d 442 (1976). Accord, Grant v. Bell, 150 Ga.App. 141(2), 257 S.E.2d 12, revd. on other grounds, Bell v. Grant, 244 Ga. 665, 261 S.E.2d 616 (1979); Carter v. Tatum, 134 Ga.App. 345(4), 212 S.E.2d 439 (1975). Although the contract itself is not a part of the record in this ......
-
Davis v. Jones
...325(2), 265 S.E.2d 120 (1980); Grant v. Bell, 150 Ga.App. 141, 145(2), 257 S.E.2d 12 (1979), rev'd on other grounds, Bell v. Grant, 244 Ga. 665, 261 S.E.2d 616 (1979). Since appellant has failed to show that she was precluded by the judge's ruling from impeaching Clifford by his deposition ......
-
Georgia's Constitutional Scheme for State Appellate Jurisdiction
...S.E.2d 397 (1997). 62. 231 Ga. 729, 204 S.E.2d 293 (1974). 63. 179 Ga. 812, 177 S.E. 741 (1934). 64. See id. at 816, 177 S.E. at 743. 65. 244 Ga. 665, 261 S.E.2d 616 (1979). 66. O.C.G.A. 9-14-1 through -23. 67. Id. 9-14-40 through -53. 68. Id. 9-14-1 (a), (b), and (c). 69. Id. 19-9-20 et se......