Gray v. Case School of Applied Science

• Decision Date: 20 February 1900
• Citation: 56 N.E. 484,62 Ohio St. 1
• Parties: GRAY et al. v. CASE SCHOOL OF APPLIED SCIENCE.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

56 N.E. 484

62 Ohio St. 1

GRAY et al. v. CASE SCHOOL OF APPLIED SCIENCE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

February 20, 1900

Error to circuit court, Cuyahoga county.

In the matter of the will of Laura K. Axtell. From a judgment for payment by trustee of legacy to the Case School of Applied Science, Gray and others bring error. Affirmed.

This case was tried in the courts below on the amended petition of the plaintiff, the answer to the amended petition, and a demurrer to the answer. The demurrer was overruled by the court of common pleas, and judgment entered for the plaintiffs in error for the amount admitted in the answer to be due. But the court refused to render judgment for interest from August 15, 1891, as claimed in the petition. The defendant prosecuted error to this decision in the circuit court of Cuyahoga county, and that court reversed the court of common pleas, and rendered judgment in favor of the defendant in error for the amount of the legacy bequeathed to it by the will of Laura K. Axtell, with interest for one year from the date of the bond of the executors. It is alleged in the amended petition that the testatrix died in 1890; that her will was proved August 15, 1890; that the executors qualified on that date; and that the first publication of notice of the appointment of the executors was on August 20 1890. By the will of the testatrix a legacy of $50,000 was given to the Case School of Applied Science, and by a codicil an additional legacy of $1,000 for a specific purpose. Payment of $42,537.50 was made on the firstnamed legacy. The executors filed their final account on the 8th day of April 1896, and on August 18, 1896, a general order of distribution was made, by which it appears that the assets are sufficient to pay all debts, and to settle all the bequests, with interest, as claimed. The amended petition also avers that the personal assets from the time of the death of Mrs. Axtell had been sufficient to pay all the legacies, with interest but that they were not collected until November 4, 1895. The answer to the amended petition avers that there were sufficient assets in the hands of the executors to pay the legacies prior to November 4, 1895, and that the time for settling another estate (the Kerr estate), from which assets were to be received by the Axtell estate, had been extended from time to time, and that it was not settled until November 4, 1895. It also claimed that the real estate of Kerr, added to the estate of Mrs. Axtell's assets, was at no time sufficient to pay the legacies, with interest. The judgment of the court of common pleas was reversed by the circuit court. To reverse the judgment of the circuit court, the defendant below filed this petition in error.

A general legacy bears interest at the legal rate from the end of the first year from the date of the notice of the appointment of the executor, unless it be clearly apparent that the testator did not so intend.

Syllabus by the Court

In this state a general legacy bears interest at the legal rate from the end of the first year from the date of the notice of the appointment of the executor, unless it be clearly apparent that the testator did not so intend.

F. J. Jerome and Lewis J. Wood, for plaintiffs in error.

Williamson, Cushing & Clarke, for defendants in error.

DAVIS, J. (after stating the facts).

It has heretofore been a rule in Ohio, as elsewhere, that a general legacy shall bear interest at the legal rate from the end of the first year from the testator's death, unless it shall be apparent that the testator did not so intend. In other words, it is an established rule of construction, in contemplation of which the testator is presumed to have made his bequest, and which will only be overturned when the testator clearly manifests a different intention. In this case the circuit court, in view of the right of the legatee to require payment of his legacy at any time within four years after the executor or administrator has given bond for discharge of the trust, on first giving an indemnity bond to the executor or administrator (Rev. St. § 6128), seems to have held that the legatee was entitled to interest from the expiration of one year from the date of the bond of the executors. 15 Ohio Cir. Ct. R. 488. The circuit court however, actually found that the court of common pleas erred in refusing to render judgment for interest from the expiration of one year from the probate of the will. Rev. St....