Crawford v. Wearn
L. W. CRAWFORD v. J. H. WEARN Et Al.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam :
After a careful examination of this ease, we have arrived at the conclusion that the rule in Shelley’s case does not apply, and that L. W. Crawford takes but a life estate in the property in question. Such seems the intention of the testator from the context of the will, and this intention, it is well settled, must prevail over technical language, when *542 such language is qualified by superadded words. We are also of the opinion that the power to “ invest or use ”
all of the property, in view of other expressions in the will, authorizes a sale of the same by the life tenant, and on this ground, the judgment is affirmed. Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.