Carr v. Hanckel

Citations

• 28 S.C. 331
• 5 S.E. 818
• 1888 S.C. LEXIS 57

Syllabus

<p>1. An estate was devised and bequeathed to trustees for the use of A (the sole heir of testatrix) for life, and then to her children and to other issue, and failing these to B in fee. A claimed from the trustees the whole estate in fee, but it was adjudged that she had only a life estate, and was not entitled to the reversion, as that would go to such person as would be the heir of testatrix when the particular estate failed. This decree also held that the limitation to B was void for remoteness. In action brought after A’s death by parties claiming under B to recover this estate from A’s devisees — held, that the privies of A could not claim an interest in_this property after her death, as the matter was res judicata. Whether B and her privies were bound by the ruling that the remainder to B was void, not decided.</p> <p>2. After A’s death, B's heir accepted from one of A’s legatees an assignment of her interest as legatee in this estate. In action by B’s heir against the trustee and the other legatee to recover this legatee’s moiety- — held, that B’s heir was not thereby estopped from disputing the right of A to dispose of any portion of this estate.</p> <p>3. But at the time that B’s heir received from the trustee the moiety purchased by her, she released and assigned to the legatees of A all her interest and right under the will of first testatrix, B’s heir then having full knowledge of all these matters, and no imposition or fraud having been practised upon her. Afterwards B’s heir purchased the rights of the person who was sole heir of first testatrix after the death of A unmarried. Held, that this release and assignment under seal bound B’s heir as to any right she may have had under the first will, and also as to any right subsequently acquired from this reversioner.</p>