Chase v. Ladd

• Decision Date: 12 January 1891
• Citation: 26 N.E. 429,153 Mass. 126
• Parties: CHASE v. LADD et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

153 Mass. 126

26 N.E. 429

CHASE v. LADD et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

January 12, 1891

Case reserved from supreme judicial court, Essex county; CHARLES DEVENS, Judge.

HEADNOTES

Wills 616(6)

409 ----

409VI Construction

409VI(E) Nature of Estates and Interests Created

409k613 Life Estates

409k616 Devise or Bequest for Life with Power of Control or Disposition

409k616(6) Conditional, Contingent, or Limited Disposition.

Under a will devising the testator's property to his wife, who is made executrix "to her use and behoof, forever; provided that, if any of the property aforesaid shall not have been expended by her for her support during her lifetime, so much of said estate as shall remain unexpended at her decease shall be disposed of in manner following," the wife takes such an interest in the estate for her life as gives her the right to use it so far as necessary for her reasonable support, even to the extent of using it all, but for no other purpose; and she also has power to sell and convey the testator's lands, and use the proceeds for her support, but for no other purpose.

Wills 692(2)

409 ----

409VI Construction

409VI(H) Estates in Trust and Powers

409VI(H)3 Testamentary Powers

409k690 Construction of Testamentary Powers

409k692 Power of Appointment, Revocation, or Disposition

409k692(2) Support and Maintenance of Donee or Beneficiary.

A devise to testator's wife "to her use and behoof forever, giving her power to expend the property for her support and maintenance during her lifetime," and providing that "so much of said estate as remains unexpended at the time of her decease" shall be disposed of in a specified manner, gives the wife the power to dispose of the property and use the proceeds only so far as is necessary for her reasonable maintenance during life.

COUNSEL

Jones Jones & Pingree, for plaintiff.

W.H Moody, for defendants.

OPINION

FIELD C.J.

The principal differences between this case and Joslin v Rhoades, 150 Mass. 301, 23 N.E. 42, are that the devise in Joslin v. Rhoades is to the wife and "her heirs and assigns forever," and in the present case it is to the wife, "to her use and behoof forever," and in Joslin v Rhoades there is no express or implied restriction upon the right or power of the devisee to dispose of the estate, unless it is to be implied from the "condition that, if any portion of my said estate should remain in the possession of my said wife at the time of her death, such remainder shall be divided" as expressed in the will; while in the present case it is distinctly implied that the wife shall have the power of expending the property only "for her support and maintenance during her life-time," and it is provided that "so much of said estate as shall remain unexpended at the time of her decease shall be disposed" of as expressed in the will. We are inclined to the opinion that these differences are significant, and that the most reasonable construction of the will is that the testator intended that the wife should have the use of the property for her support and maintenance, with the power...