## Facts

- G.A. Williams died in 1944 owning a 188-acre farm in McMinn County, Tennessee.
- His will devised the farm to his three unmarried daughters (Ida, Mallie, and Ethel) as a “joint lifetime interest,” barred any sale while any daughter was alive, and provided that if a daughter married “her interest would cease” and shift to the remaining unmarried daughters.
- The will explained the preference for these daughters as compensation for caring for their ill mother and to prevent them from being “sold out of a home.”
- None of the three daughters ever married; Ethel survived Ida and Mallie and claimed the farm in fee simple as the last surviving named devisee.
- Other descendants asserted the daughters held only life estates and that the property would pass to the testator’s heirs at law when the daughters’ interests ended.
- The chancery court first found fee simple interests, then on rehearing held Ethel had only a life estate with remainder passing by intestate succession; the court of appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether the will devised the farm to the three unmarried daughters in fee simple or as a joint life estate (determinable on marriage or death).
2. Whether explicit “lifetime” and “until marriage” limitations overcame the general presumption favoring construction of devises as fee simple.
3. If the daughters received only life estates, how the remainder should pass given the will’s silence as to remaindermen.

## Decision

- The Tennessee Supreme Court held the will granted the daughters a joint life estate, determinable upon marriage or death, not a fee simple.
- The Court concluded the will’s repeated lifetime and unmarried-status limitations, coupled with the no-sale condition, reflected an intent to provide support and shelter rather than full alienable ownership.
- Because the will did not dispose of the remainder after termination of the life estate, the property would pass to the testator’s heirs at law by intestate succession.

## Legal Principles

- A will is construed to effectuate the testator’s predominant intent as expressed by the instrument’s language and context.
- Explicit language granting a “joint lifetime interest,” conditioning continuation on unmarried status, and prohibiting sale during the devisees’ lives indicates a life estate rather than a fee simple.
- A general presumption favoring fee simple yields when the will contains clear limiting language showing a contrary intent.
- When a will creates a life estate but fails to specify remaindermen, the undisposed remainder passes by intestate succession.

## Conclusion

The court construed the farm devise as a joint life estate for the three unmarried daughters, ending upon death or marriage, and held that the remainder was not devised and therefore passed to the testator’s heirs at law by intestacy rather than vesting fee simple title in the last surviving daughter.


Williams v. Estate of Williams, 865 S.W.2d 3 (Tenn. 1993)