Epting v. Mayer
South Carolina Court of Appeals
323 S.E.2d 797 (1984)
Mahalie Epting's will left her real estate to her daughters in fee simple absolute, with the surviving daughter to take if one predeceased her, but later language in the same provision addressed what would happen to Mahalie's sons' shares if the sons died before the daughters, potentially suggesting the daughters held only a life estate with a remainder to the sons' children; when Chloe (plaintiff), Mahalie's only surviving child, sought a declaration that she held the property in fee simple absolute, her nieces and nephews (defendants) argued they were entitled to a remainder interest their late fathers would have received. The trial court ruled for Chloe.
Whether a bequest or devise that unequivocally gives property in fee simple absolute is nullified by subsequent inconsistent language that is less clear.