Maynard v. Greer

Decision Date21 December 1907
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court
PartiesMAYNARD et al. v. GREER et al.
1. Wills — Construction — Estate Devised —Condition Subsequent.

In 1859 a testator executed his will, in which he bequeathed certain property to a named trustee for the sole and separate use of three daughters of the testator, and any other child or children who might be born to him, share and share alike, and in no manner to be subject to the debts or contracts of the husbands of said children, "but to be held in trust by the said (trustee) for their sole and separate use upon the following condition and limitation: that is to say, if either of my children now in life or hereafter born should die without issue living at the time of their death, then the portion of such child or children so dying is to be held in trust for the survivor or survivors equally, share and share alike: if all of my children should die leaving no issue living at their death; then the whole property bequeathed them in trust in this the sixth item of this my will, with the increase, is to revert and become the property of my estate, share and share alike, to my nephews and nieces, the children of" certain named parents. Held, that the estate created for the benefit of the testator's daughters was one in fee, subject to be divested upon the happening of the contingency specified. See Hill v. Terrell, 123 Ga. 49, 51 S. E. 81.

2. Trusts — Sale — Authority of Trustee — Order of Court.

Another item of the will provided that: "For the purpose of managing and preserving the property bequeathed to my children in the sixth item of my will, I hereby appoint and constitute (a named person) before mentioned, trustee, to manage and control their property, and also as testamentary guardian to superintend, control and direct the education and maintenance of my children; hereby vesting and clothing him as such trustee with full force, whenever he shall deem the interest of the trust estate requires it, to sell any part or portion of the estate, and reinvest it for the benefit and use of the children, at his discretion, subject to the trust and limitation before specified. I further give him full power and authority to invest such portion of my estate as may be in money, in money bonds, notes or other obligations, as well as the whole or any portion of the profit or net income from the estate in such manner as he may deem most conducive to the interests of the estate and [to] carry out the purpose of the trust." Held, tha...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Lugue v. Hercules, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia
    • October 22, 1997
    ...to him, and that personal powers cannot be transferred to subsequent trustees. (Def.'s Br.Supp.Summ.J. p. 5). See Maynard v. Greer, 129 Ga. 709, 710, 59 S.E. 798 (1907). Hercules' argument fails, however, because Granville's power to convey the land was not a personal power. Georgia courts ......
  • F. v. Hassam v. J. E. Safford Lumber Company And J. E Safford
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • October 9, 1909
    ... ... 609, an unsealed deed, Barger v. Hobbs, 67 ... Ill. 592, a trustee's deed ineffectual because not ... authorized by the court, Maynard v. Greer, ... (Ga.) 59 S.E. 798, a deed void because not joined in by the ... grantor's husband. So. Ry. Co. v ... Hays, (Ala.) 43 So. 487, a ... ...
  • Gilmore v. Gilmore
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • January 9, 1947
    ... ... B. & L. Ass'n, 100 Ga. 20, 28 S.E. 274; Heath v ... Miller, 117 Ga. 854, 44 S.E. 13; Luquire v ... Lee, 121 Ga. 624, 629, 49 S.E. 834; Maynard v ... Greer, 129 Ga. 709(2), 59 S.E. 798; Vernoy v ... Robinson, 133 Ga. 653, 66 S.E. 928. Upon an application ... of this rule to the facts of ... ...
  • Hassam v. Safford
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • October 9, 1909
    ...609), an unsealed deed (Barger v. Hobbs, 67 Ill. 592), a trustee's deed ineffectual because not authorized by the court (Maynard v. Greer, 129 Ga. 709, 59 S. E. 798), a deed void because not joined in by the grantor's husband (So. Ry. Co. v. Hays, 150 Ala. 212, 43 South. 487), a void deed f......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT