Devise — Rule in Shelley's Case — Intent of Testator — Effect of the Words "Invest or Use."
1. In the construction of a will the intention of a testator must prevail over merely technical language, when such language is qualified by superadded words.
2. A testator devised to L. "the use of $1,000, also four lots," and added: "The said L. may invest or use all this property as he may in his discretion think best, during his natural life, and at his death to go to the heirs of his body and be used for their education, if necessary": Held, that the rule in Shelley's case does not apply, and L. takes only a life estate in the property.
3. In such case the words "invest or use" authorize a sale of the property by the life tenant.
BURWELL, J., did not sit on the hearing of this case.
PER CURIAM:
After a careful examination of this case, 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 such language is qualified by superadded words. (542) 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.
Cited: Hooker v. Montague, 123 N.C. 158; Foil v. Newsome, 138 N.C. 123; Powell v. Woodcock, 149 N.C. 240; Ripley v. Armstrong, 159 N.C. 159; Albright v. Albright, 172 N.C. 353.