## Facts

- In 1920, T. A. Hall executed a warranty deed conveying three tracts of land to his wife, Betty Hall.
- The deed’s granting clause conveyed Hall’s “Entire” right and title to Betty.
- The habendum clause stated that if Hall died first and left Betty his widow, she would have “full control and full power” to deal with the property as she wished “just so long as she lives my widow,” but if she remarried the deed would become void to her and the property would “fall to my children.”
- T. A. Hall died in 1957; Betty did not remarry.
- In 1978, Betty and various family members conveyed the land by deed to Ronnie and Randall Dixon, purporting to transfer fee simple absolute title.
- Opal Hall and certain grandchildren challenged the conveyance, asserting Betty’s interest was defeasible and the Dixons took subject to the remarriage condition.

## Issues

1. Whether the 1920 deed conveyed Betty Hall a fee simple absolute or a lesser defeasible estate due to the remarriage condition.
2. Whether the limitation over to the grantor’s children upon Betty’s remarriage is valid where the deed grants Betty an unlimited power to control and dispose of the property.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the judgments of the chancery court and court of appeals.
- The court held Betty Hall took a fee simple absolute under the 1920 deed.
- The court held the attempted limitation over to the grantor’s children upon Betty’s remarriage was void because the deed gave Betty an unlimited power of disposition.
- Consequently, the Dixons acquired fee simple absolute title not subject to divestment upon any remarriage by Betty.

## Legal Principles

- By statute, a deed is presumed to pass the grantor’s entire estate unless an intent to pass a lesser estate appears by express terms or necessary implication.
- A conveyance granting the grantee an unlimited power of disposition is inconsistent with, and defeats, an attempted future interest or limitation over to third parties; such a limitation over is void as repugnant to the estate granted.
- Ambiguities in deed language concerning the quantum of the estate are resolved in favor of a fee simple when the instrument does not clearly cut down the grant.

## Conclusion

The court construed the deed, together with Tennessee’s statutory presumption, to vest Betty Hall with fee simple absolute ownership and treated the remarriage-triggered gift over to the children as void because it conflicted with the deed’s grant of unlimited power to deal with the property.


Hall v. Hall, 604 S.W.2d 851 (Tenn. 1980)