Judges: OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE SILER
Attorneys: Woodward, Dawson, Hobson Fulton, Wilbur O. Fields, Lee S. Jones and James S. Shaw for appellants.
Robert E. Hogan, Michael M. Hellmann and Henry J. Tilford for appellees.
Filed: Oct. 07, 1947
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Reversing. This case involves two appeals, but it appears to be necessary to treat only one, in view of the manner of our final disposition. In the beginning, this was a petition seeking a settlement of the estate of Chris C. Shoemaker, deceased, but a subsequent pleading made it a declaratory judgment action seeking a judicial interpretation of Shoemaker's will. Merrill Shoemaker and Willard Bartoe, nephews of the decedent and also beneficiaries under his will, are the principal appellants, whi
Summary: Reversing. This case involves two appeals, but it appears to be necessary to treat only one, in view of the manner of our final disposition. In the beginning, this was a petition seeking a settlement of the estate of Chris C. Shoemaker, deceased, but a subsequent pleading made it a declaratory judgment action seeking a judicial interpretation of Shoemaker's will. Merrill Shoemaker and Willard Bartoe, nephews of the decedent and also beneficiaries under his will, are the principal appellants, whil..
More
I think the will is so worded that it is virtually impossible to arrive at the true intent of the maker, and, therefore, it is void for uncertainty. But should it be deemed not void, then I think the interpretation of the chancellor should be followed.
