## Facts

- Fount Cox owned an approximately 100-acre farm in Edmonson County, Kentucky, and died in 1910 leaving a will disposing of the farm.
- The will gave Cox’s widow, Julia Cox, a life estate, with subsequent takers determined by contingencies tied to (1) Julia’s sister Medie Woosley’s marital status and (2) the survival of Cox’s brothers Sam Cox and J.M. Cox.
- Under the will’s described sequence: (a) Medie would take if alive and unmarried at Julia’s death; otherwise (b) Sam and J.M. would take; and if either brother was dead at Julia’s death, (c) the brothers’ children would take.
- Medie married in 1916.
- Julia remarried in 1918 and then conveyed her interest in the farm to Sam Cox.
- Sam and J.M. conveyed the interest obtained from Julia and their own claimed interests to Mrs. O. H. Fishback.
- Sam and J.M. died in 1937; Julia died in 1954.
- Keith claimed title as successor to Fishback; Rutherford and other descendants of Sam and J.M. claimed title under the will.

## Issues

1. Whether Julia Cox’s remarriage terminated the life estate granted to her under the will.
2. Whether termination of Julia’s estate caused fee-simple title to vest in Sam Cox and J.M. Cox so that their conveyance to Fishback passed the entire fee.
3. Whether the children and grandchildren of Sam and J.M. held an independent remainder interest under the will that survived the brothers’ conveyance.

## Decision

- The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment quieting title in Keith.
- The court held Julia’s life estate was defeasible and ended upon her remarriage.
- The court concluded fee-simple title vested in Sam and J.M. upon termination of Julia’s estate, and their conveyance validly transferred the fee to Fishback and her successors.
- The court rejected the descendants’ claim to any superior title under the will.

## Legal Principles

- A testamentary life estate may be construed as defeasible where the will conditions the widow’s enjoyment on remaining unmarried; remarriage can operate as a terminating event.
- In will construction, the controlling objective is the testator’s intent as determined from the instrument’s terms and the operative contingencies.
- When a defeasible prior estate ends and the will’s contingencies are resolved, the succeeding estate may vest so as to permit the vested holders to convey the fee.
- A clause referencing “children” of named takers does not create an enforceable independent interest if, under the will as construed, the named takers take the fee upon termination of the prior estate.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Keith’s title, ruling that Julia Cox’s remarriage ended her defeasible life estate and vested the fee in Sam and J.M. Cox, whose deed to Fishback transferred the entire ownership interest, leaving the brothers’ descendants without an independent claim under the will.


Rutherford v. Keith, 444 S.W.2d 546 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969)