Ryan v. Ryan

• Decision Date: 14 April 1919
• Docket Number: 182
• Citation: 211 S.W. 183,138 Ark. 362
• Parties: RYAN v. RYAN
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

211 S.W. 183

138 Ark. 362

RYAN v. RYAN

No. 182

Supreme Court of Arkansas

April 14, 1919

Appeal from Greene Chancery Court; Archer Wheatley, Chancellor affirmed.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.

Appellants brought this suit in the chancery court against appellees to enjoin them from tearing down and removing the houses on lots 6 and 7 in block 12, of West End Addition to the city of Paragould, Arkansas. The facts are as follows:

Appellee A. A. Ryan, is a son and heir at law of John H. Ryan and appellee, M. A. Ryan, is his wife. Appellants are the minor children of A. A. Ryan. John H. Ryan made a will in which he devised all of his property to his children and heirs at law which are A. A. Ryan, N. C. Tedder, C. D. Bowlin, L. V Dacus, V. L. Brust and Lucy Adams. So much of the will as is necessary to the decision of the issues involved in this appeal is as follows:

"Know all men by these presents, that I, John Ryan, being in sound mind and body and recognizing the certainty of death, and the uncertainty of life, being desirous of making my last will and testament. Now it is my will for Sarah Ryan, the wife John Ryan, to have place that we are living on at present being this the 1916. Described as follows, towit: Block 12 lots 6 and 7, in the city of Paragould, Arkansas, and six hundred dollars in money now at her death should any money be left after paying sixty-five dollars for a tombstone to be put to her grave, then the balance to be divided between our children.

"Now after all of the above have been fulfilled then the above place, which is described as follows, towit:

"Block 12, lots 6 and 7, goes to A. A. Ryan, heir of John Ryan. I value this place that we are living on at present to be worth five hundred dollars more than any other places that I have got. J. H. Ryan.

"Now if Sarah Ryan is living on the place that we are living on at present, then the other heirs is to pay A. A. Ryan one dollar each, that is, N. C. Tedder, C. D. Bowlin, L. V. Dacus, V. L. Brust and Lucy Adams, per month for rent as long as she lives on the place, that is Sarah Ryan, the wife of John H. Ryan, then at Sarah Ryan's death, then this place that is described as follows, towit: Block 12, lots 6 and 7, in the city of Paragould, go to A. A. Ryan, heir of J. H. Ryan, and at his death goes to his heirs. Now it is my will for all that I have written to go just as I have said."

The land described in the will is the land involved in this controversy. John H. Ryan died, and his will was duly probated. The widow and devisees and heirs at law of John H. Ryan, deceased, conveyed by deed the property in controversy to A. A. Ryan and the latter entered into the possession of it. A. A. Ryan claims that under the terms of the will he has a fee simple title to the property in controversy. His children claim that he has only a life estate in it. Hence this lawsuit.

The decision of the chancellor was in favor of appellees and the case is here on appeal.

Decision affirmed.

Huddleston, Fuhr & Futrell, for appellants.

1. A will is to be construed so as to carry out the intention of the testator unless that intention conflicts with some rule of law or is contrary to public policy.

2. Where an estate is limited to one person and immediately or mediately thereafter is given to the heirs of such person, the first person takes an estate in fee simple.

3. The word "heirs" shall not be construed as one of limitation in wills when it is clear from the intention of the testator that the term "heirs" was intended to be a word of purchase. The first proposition needs no citation of authorities. The second and third are sustained by Tiedeman on Real Prop., § 30; 13 Ark. 88.

It is apparent that the testator intended to give and that A. A. Ryan took a life estate and not the fee simple title to the lots. Supra.

OPINION

HART, J., (after stating the facts).

The only question presented by the appeal is as to the proper construction of the will set out in our statement...