20 A. 97 | R.I. | 1890
The principal question in this case arises on the third clause of the will of Lucina W. Paine, a follows: "Thirdly, I give and devise to my nephew, John Alber Paine, the other half of my real estate during his natural life, and after his decease to his heirs, their heirs and assigns forever.' The question is, whether said John Albert took under said clause an estate in fee simple, or only an estate for life. It is admitted that he would have taken a fee simple under the rule in Shelley's case, if the words "their heirs and assigns forever" had not been added to the words "his heirs." The question is, then, whether said superadded words take the devise out of the rule in Shelley's case by showing that "his heirs" were used, not as words of inheritance or limitation, but to point out particular persons as devisees in remainder, to wit: the persons who at the death of said John Albert would be his heirs. In Manchester wife v. Durfee,
Our decision is, that said John Albert took an estate in fee simple.
