Narrative Opinion Summary
Jurisdiction to construe a will arises only when its language is uncertain, vague, ambiguous, or conflicting, which creates doubt about the testator's true intent. If the will's language is clear and has a recognized legal meaning, no construction is necessary. In this case, the court determined that the language of the will was clear, establishing that the feme plaintiff, who survived the testator, became the owner of the property in fee simple, subject only to a prior life estate granted to her mother. The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Lower Court's Judgmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The higher court affirmed the decision of the lower court as the will's language was deemed clear and unambiguous.
Reasoning: The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.
Clear Language of a Willsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the will's language was clear, thereby establishing the feme plaintiff as the owner of the property in fee simple, subject to a life estate.
Reasoning: In this case, the court determined that the language of the will was clear, establishing that the feme plaintiff, who survived the testator, became the owner of the property in fee simple, subject only to a prior life estate granted to her mother.
Jurisdiction to Construe a Willsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that since the will's language was clear and had a recognized legal meaning, there was no need for judicial construction.
Reasoning: Jurisdiction to construe a will arises only when its language is uncertain, vague, ambiguous, or conflicting, which creates doubt about the testator's true intent.