Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Limitations over upon the marriage of a widow shall be valid unless such limitations are manifestly intended to operate as a restraint upon the free action of such widow in respect to marriage and are not simply prudent provisions for the protection of the interest of children or others in such event, in which case such limitations are void.
(Orig. Code 1863, § 2254; Code 1868, § 2246; Code 1873, § 2272; Code 1882, § 2272; Civil Code 1895, § 3108; Civil Code 1910, § 3684; Code 1933, § 85-712.)
- For comment on Broach v. Hester, 217 Ga. 59, 121 S.E.2d 111 (1961), see 14 Mercer L. Rev. 471 (1963).
- Estate for widowhood, as known to the common law, is recognized in this state and provided for by the terms of this statute. The creation of a fee defeasible by marriage is not necessarily in restraint of marriage, because the beneficiary is submitted to an election between the acceptance of the gift and remarriage, should she prefer to remarry. Logan v. Hammond, 155 Ga. 514, 117 S.E. 428 (1923) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-6-68).
- Condition imposed by a testator upon a gift to his widow, to the effect that upon her remarriage the devise shall pass to his other heirs named, is not void as being in restraint of marriage. The intention to impose a penalty in terrorem must be manifest and unequivocal. Logan v. Hammond, 155 Ga. 514, 117 S.E. 428 (1923).
Statute applies to contracts as well as to the provisions of a will. Holder v. Holder, 226 Ga. 254, 174 S.E.2d 408 (1970), overruled on other grounds, Scott v. Scott, 276 Ga. 372, 578 S.E.2d 876 (2003) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-6-68).
- When an estate was devised to X, and widow during her widowhood, even if the provisions were invalid as being in restraint of marriage, it would not affect the estate granted to X. McCarty v. Mangham, 144 Ga. 198, 86 S.E. 555 (1915).
Estates for widowhood are subject to the same rules as life estates. Among the rules applicable to life estates are the provisions of former Civil Code 1910, § 3666 (see O.C.G.A. § 44-6-83). Lee & Bradshaw v. Rogers, 151 Ga. 838, 108 S.E. 371 (1921).
- Agreement for the custody of the children to change to the father upon the remarriage of the mother does not manifest an intention that the agreement will operate in restraint of remarriage, and is not void as being in restraint of marriage. Holder v. Holder, 226 Ga. 254, 174 S.E.2d 408 (1970), overruled on other grounds, Scott v. Scott, 276 Ga. 372, 578 S.E.2d 876 (2003).
Cited in McCray v. Caves, 211 Ga. 770, 88 S.E.2d 373 (1955).
- 28 Am. Jur. 2d, Estates, §§ 279, 310.
- 31 C.J.S., Estates, § 78. 96 C.J.S., Wills, § 1276.
- Misconduct of surviving spouse as affecting marital rights in other's estate, 139 A.L.R. 486.
Remarriage tables, 25 A.L.R.2d 1464.
No results found for Georgia Code 44-6-68.