 | William Hayes - Conveyancing - 1835 - 616 pages
...has justly observed, (.lesson v. Wright, 2 Bligh, 57,) that ' to say that the general intent shall overrule the particular is not the most accurate expression of the principle of decision, but that the rule is, that technical words shall have their legal effect, unless from subsequent inconsistent... | |
 | Tennessee. Supreme Court, George Shall Yerger - Law reports, digests, etc - 1836 - 640 pages
...follows that he was ignorant of the effect of the one or of the other. All the cases but Doe vs. Gojf, decide that the latter words, unless they contain...The rule is, that technical words shall have their legal^effect, unless from subsequent inconsistent words it is very clear that the testator meapt otherwise.... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Common Pleas, Sir William Hodges - Law reports, digests, etc - 1836 - 508 pages
...clear that such was the intention of the testator." In Je»son v. Wright (x) Lord Redesdale says, " The rule is, that technical words shall have their...effect, unless from subsequent inconsistent words it i» very clear that the testator meant otherwise." Lane v. Earl of Stanhope (y) ; Robinson v. Robinson... | |
 | Thomas Jarman - Wills - 1844 - 820 pages
...follows that he was ignorant of the effect of the one or of the other. All the cases but Doe v. Gojf(f) decide that the latter words, unless they contain...the legal import of the former, are to be rejected. Lord Redes- That the general intent should overrule the particular, is not date'* state- y , , . .... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Chancery - Equity - 1846 - 730 pages
...119. (c) a Bligh, 1 ; see pp. 53 and 57. 1843. THE EARL OF VERULAM v. BATHURST. 1843. Redesdale said: "The rule is that technical words shall ^ " have their legal effect, unless, from subsequent inconTHE EARL or sistent words, it i8 very clear that the testator meaat otherwise." But is there anything... | |
 | Great Britain. Courts - Law reports, digests, etc - 1864 - 584 pages
...rule to say "the general intent shall overrule the particular, but the rule," said his lordship, " is, that technical words shall have their legal effect, unless, from subsequent words, it is very clear that the testator meant otherwise." But the same doctrine had repeatedly *3591... | |
 | Thomas Jarman - Wills - 1881 - 934 pages
...follows that he was ignorant of the effect of the one or of the other. All the cases but Doe v. Goff (k) decide that the latter words, unless they contain...rejected. That the general intent should overrule the particrilar, Lor(j is not the most accurate expression of the principle of decision. dale's 8tateTke... | |
 | Thomas Jarman - Wills - 1881 - 954 pages
...follows that he was ignorant of the effect of the one or of the other. All the cases but Doe v. Goff (A) decide that the latter words, unless they contain...former, are to be rejected. That the general intent thmdd overrule the particular, is not the most accurate expression of the principle of decision. The... | |
 | Charles Fisk Beach (Jr.) - Wills - 1888 - 650 pages
...general intention of the testator, the accuracy of the rule has been doubted ;5 and it is said : " That the general intent should overrule the particular...technical words shall have their legal effect, unless from subsesequent inconsistent words it is very clear that the testator meant otherwise."6 1 Schouler on... | |
 | John Chipman Gray - Personal property - 1891 - 1022 pages
...example — it can make no difference in the result. Lord Redesdale says ' that the general intent shall overrule the particular is not the most accurate expression...technical words shall have their legal effect, unless from other words it is very clear that the testator meant otherwise.1 " — Per LORD WENSLEYDALE, in Roddy... | |
| |
... in their ordinary legal sense, because there are other inconsistent words ; but it only follows that he was ignorant of the effect of the one or of the other. All the cases but Doe v. 
