Citation Numbers: 151 Ky. 64
Judges: Lassing
Filed Date: 12/5/1912
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/24/2022
Opinion of the Court by
Affirming.
Lewis D. Scott died testate, a resident of Simpson County, Kentucky, the owner of certain real estate. By his will, which was duly probated, he directed his executor to sell said real estate. In pursuance of said authority, Dave Scott, whom he named as executor, sold the land to D. W. C. Smith and tendered him a general warranty deed therefor. Conceiving that there was a defect in the title, Smith declined to accept the deed.Thereupon the executor instituted a suit to compel him to do so. The defendant, by way of defense, while admitting that the title to said property was perfect in the decedent, pleaded that the decedent in his lifetime had executed a writing whereby he conveyed, or attempted to convey, the land in controversy to one of his children, for life, with remainder to said child’s children, if he had any living at his death, and, if not, then the land should revert to his estate; that, by reason of said writing, the executor had no power to convey and pass title to the fee to said land; and that he should, not, on this account, be required to accept the deed so tendered to him. In his reply, the executor admitted that the decedent, in his lifetime, attempted to divide his landed estate among his children, and convey to each the portion thereof, which he desired him to have; that he, in furtherance of this desire, executed and de
“The rule is that if a paper passes no interest in the lifetime of the maker, whatever may be its form, if it is operative only upon his death, it is a will and to be effective must be probated. On the other hand, the object of all construction is to arrive at the intention of the parties and their intention, where it is apparent on the face of the papers, will be carried into effect if it can be fairly done under its terms.”
Accepting then, the intention of the decedent, at the time these writings were drawn, as a guide in determin
The only remaining question is: Does the language used by the testator, confer, upon the executor power to sell and convey his real estate? Upon this point, the will provides:
“I desire that my executor hereinafter appointed sell the home place (this is the land in question) located north of Franklin, Ky., on the Louisville and Nashville pike and invest the proceeds in good interest bearing bonds or real estate notes. * * *
“I hereby appoint my brother, Dave Scott, as my executor empowering him to execute deed to the sale of the real estate mentioned above and to act without bond.”
This is an unqualified direction, first, that Ms executor shall make a sale of this land; and second, that, having made the sale, he shall convey the land. Authority could not have been given in any more direct, positive or unambiguous terms. The chancellor correctly held that the executor was empowered to make the sale and, by deed, convey or pass the title to his purchaser. We are further of the opinion that the deed tendered by the executor passed the fee simple title to the land; and appellant having failed to show any good reason why he should not accept the deed and pay for the land, the chancellor did not err in requiring him to do so.
Judgment affirmed.