Court Opinion

ID: 9626835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 08:25:11.425529+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:06:34.165412
License: Public Domain

Bowles, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent from Division 3 of the opinion.
The forfeiture clause plainly said: "In the event that the grantor herein or his wife should discontinue the use of the house on the above property for their personal residence, then and in that event all rights herein reserved shall be forfeited to the grantee herein.” (Emphasis supplied.) The trial court concluded that the plain language of this clause meant "that should either the husband or wife discontinue the use of the house, either voluntarily or involuntarily, which would include death of one of them, that the life use of the residence and the tract of land on which it is situated would be terminated.” I think the trial court was correct in so holding.
I am authorized to state that Justice Jordan joins in this dissent.