James E. Feeney, IV v. Marjorie R. P. Feeney, Individually and as Executor and Trustee of the Estate of James E. Feeney, Jr., et al.; Sean Patrick Feeney v. Marjorie R. P. Feeney, Individually and as Executor and Trustee of the Estate of James E. Feeney, Jr., et al., 295 Va. 312

Summary

The Supreme Court of Virginia construed a will’s residuary clause and held that it granted the testator’s wife a life estate by implication, subject to the limitations expressed in the will. The court also held that the doctrine of judicial instructions did not support an award of attorneys’ fees because the sons had consistently maintained that the will was unambiguous. The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Holdings

1. The residuary clause created a life estate by implication in Marjorie, impaired to the extent of the limitations expressed in the will, rather than a fee simple with an absolute power of disposition.
2. The court affirmed the denial of attorney's fees because the sons consistently maintained that the will was unambiguous; an ambiguity necessitating litigation is a condition precedent to applying the judicial-instructions doctrine. The court expressly declined to decide whether Virginia recognizes the doctrine.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the will's residuary clause granted Marjorie a fee simple or a life estate by implication in the residual property.
2. Whether the sons were entitled to attorney's fees and guardian ad litem fees under the doctrine of judicial instructions.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded