Americus times-recorder. [volume] (Americus, Ga.) 1891-current, 1920-01-23
CLAY WILL CASE
FULLY SETTLED
BYCOURTRULINC
Accounting To Come
Next-Son's Share
Drawn, Report

Attorneys here IN the case of Cliff
c. Clay VS.. Mrs. Mary Clay, his moth
er, have just received from Atlanta
the text of the decision of the Su-
preme Court on the appeal of Mrs.
Clay'S attorney from the ruling of
Judge Littlejohn of the Sumter Su-
perlor Court, on a demurrer in the
suit brought by the son for a con-
struction of his fathers will by the
court. The text reveals that the will
Is completely construed by the Su-
preme Court in accordance with the
contention of Mr.. Clay.
The case is suit brought by Cliff
& Clay, former assistant commission
er OF agriculture of Georgia, against
MS mother, Mrs. Mary B. Clay, seek
ing to secure construction upon the
Will of his father, the late Cliff C.
Clay, who died a number of years
ago. 1t was pointed out by his at
Sorneys that his suit was in no sense
an effort to break the will, but mere
~ an effort to force legal construc-
ton of it.
Sued for Profits.
The Clay estate, which is conser.
vatively estimated to be worth in the
neighborhood of $15O,OOO, was de-
vised to Mrs. Mary B. Clay by her
husband to be held and administered
by her during 20 years. Others heirs
with Mrs. Clay, are Cliff Clay, who
was suing his mother, and Henry
Clay, minor, both sons of the tes-
tator.
y Cliff Clay was represented by
Shipp & Sheppard, and in his suit
asked that the annual profits of the
estate be ordered distributed equally
among himself, his mother and his
brother, and in addition, he sued to
force his mother to give an account
ing for such profits alleged to have
been earned by the estate during the
years 1914, 1915, 1915 and 1917,
during which period he alleged he
had received no revenue whatever
from the estate.
Attorneys Hixon & Pace, who rep
resented Mrs. Clay in the case. filed
a demurrer before Judge Littlejohn,
which, being overruled, was appealed,
and Judge Littlejohn's decision has
just been sustained by the Supreme
Court.
Conflicting Provisions.
The will contained two clauses,
contradictory in a sense, the first of
which directed that the property be
left "under the direction of my exc
cutrix entirely discretionary with her
what annual allowance she shall
make to my sons, knowing that l can
trust mothers love to do right by
her children" The will further on
provided that should the executix,
who was the widow of the deceased
and the defendant in the suit, marry
again she should cease to be execu-
trix under the will, "but the testa
mentary scheme herein expressed
shall be carried out by legally ap-
pointed administrator. The annual
income is still to be paid to her for
her benefit and for the benefit of my
children who may remain minors, but
the portion due to such as may be
of age to be paid to them respec-
lively"
Although Mrs. Clay has never mar
ried again, setting up the condition
name in the second clause quoted,
the Supreme Court decision con-
strues this clause as governing the
win, although it was the contention
of the defense that the other clause
should govern. =.
Tn the pleadings of the defense it
was set out that Cliff Clay was in
debted to the estate several thou
sand dollars for money drawn by
him during the time he had charge
q of the Clay plantation several years
n ago. and that the sur which it is
hinted may amount t6~as much as
$4,000 or more, is greater than any
accumulated profits from the estate
which may now be due him.
To Establish Accounting.
II is said that the next step in the
ease now is for both sides to the
suit, through their attorneys, to get
together. establish an accounting,
and proceed to division Of the prof
its under the decision. 1t was stat
ed today, however, that the defense
in the accounting will charge against
the plaintiffs share the amount due
the estate by him, which is permitted
under the decision.
Mrs. Clay, the defendant in the
case, is one of Sumter county's larg