Haslam v. Alvarez
| Decision Date | 26 June 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 1678.,1678. |
| Citation | 38 A.2d 158 |
| Parties | HASLAM v. ALVAREZ et al. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Action by Charles R. Haslam, executor and trustee under the will of Marie Constance de Alvarez, against Pedro W. de Alvarez and others for the construction of and instructions relative to the will. The cause was certified to the Supreme Court for determination in accordance with Gen.Laws 1938, c. 545, § 7.
Decree in accordance with opinion.
Charles R. Haslam, of Providence, for complainant.
Greenough, Lyman & Cross, Henry Parsons Cross, and Owen P. Reid, all of Providence, for respondent de Alvarez.
Edward W. Day, of Providence, for respondent Constance F. Saacke.
Oscar L. Heltzen, of Providence, guardian ad litem of Annmary Church, minor respondent.
This cause was begun by a bill in equity filed in the superior court by the executor of, and trustee under, the will of Marie Constance de Alvarez, who at the time of her death was a resident of the city of Warwick in this state, for the construction of, and instructions relative to, clauses second to fifth, inclusive, of that will. All of the beneficiaries under the will who are financially interested in the questions involved were made parties respondent.
Answers were filed by the adult respondents and by the guardian ad litem of Annmary Church, a minor respondent. No issues of fact were raised, but only questions of law as to whether the gifts made by these clauses respectively were general or specific. Testimony by the complainant only was introduced. The cause, being then ready for hearing for final decree, was certified by the superior court to this court for determination in accordance with General Laws 1938, chapter 545, § 7.
At her decease on September 12, 1940, the testatrix owned personal property which, according to the inventory filed in the probate court, had a total value of $31,771.91; and she also owned an undivided half interest, valued at $5000, in certain real estate on which she resided and which is situated in that part of the city of Warwick commonly known as Cowesett.
Her personal property then consisted of the following items: cash assets in the amount of $1407.66; 178 shares of the capital stock of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, of the value of $29,192 at the time of her death; certain articles of household furniture then valued at $112; an undivided half interest, which was valued at $652, in certain other articles of household furniture, and which she had received as a bequest by her mother; and an undivided half interest, which was valued at $408.25, in certain jewelry and silverware, and which she had likewise received from her mother. The total assets of personal property, tangible and intangible, belonging to the testatrix at the time of her death, therefore, amounted to $31,771.91.
The expenses of her last sickness, her other debts at the time of her death, the expenses of her funeral, the Rhode Island estate tax, the expenses of administration, outside of the fee of the executor and fees for legal services which together were estimated at $1500, came to a total of $3301.80.
All of the real estate belonging to the testatrix and all of her personal assets, outside of the cash items, were covered by the devise and bequests in clauses second to fifth, inclusive, of the will; and the cash items were very far from being sufficient to cover the liabilities of the estate and necessary expenses. Hence nothing could pass by the residuary clause of the will, which was the only other disposing clause; and it is necessary for us to determine how the deficit should be paid out of the assets which the executrix tried to dispose of in clauses second to fifth, inclusive.
It therefore is necessary to determine which of the gifts in the will are general and which are specific. This is so because it is a settled rule of law that if, on account of the total amount of the liabilities and expenses of administration of a testate decedent's estate exceeding the amount of its assets covered only by the residuary clause of the will, there must be an abatement of at least some of the gifts made outside of the residuary clause, such abatement must be applied to all general gifts before it is applied to any specific gifts.
In Dean v. Rounds, 18 R.I. 436, 27 A. 515, 28 A. 802, the third clause of a certain will was involved. This clause was as follows: “All moneys or legacies coming to me from any source I give and bequeath to my brother and sister, including my stepson, Walter B. Rounds, to be divided equally, to share and share alike.” As to this the court said:
After citing authorities in support of this statement, the court, at page 437, of 18 R.I., at page 515 of 27 A., said: “Had the bequest been of ‘all moneys or legacies coming to me from my father,’ ‘of all legacies coming to me under the Dean will,’ ‘of all the furniture belonging to me, in my house at A.,’ * * * it would doubtless have been a specific legacy. * * * and the rule is that a legacy should not be construed as specific, unless clearly so intended.”
In Re Martin, Petitioner, 25 R.I. 1, at page 13, 54 A. 589, at page 594, this court pointed out that under the will then before it “the debts of the testatrix are not expressly made chargeable upon any particular part of her estate.” That is the situation in the instant case. A little farther down on the same page the court said: “The general rule is that the general or residuary personal estate constitutes the natural and primary fund for the payment of the testatrix's debts.” After citing an authority, the court continues thus: “The next class of property liable for the testatrix's debts in the case at bar comprises general legacies and general devises; both standing on a footing of equal liability, and contributing ratably inter se.”
The next paragraph of the opinion, omitting the citation of authorities at the end, is as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hawaiian Trust Co. v. Wilder
...($170,000 federal and $36,000 State).4 This Article Seventh is set out in the appendix of the main opinion.5 As held in Haslam v. De Alvarez, 70 R.I. 212, 38 A.2d 158, the surrounding circumstances may be looked to.6 Compare Equitable Trust Co. v. Delaware Trust Co., 30 Del.Ch. 348, 61 A.2d......
-
McGee v. McGee, 78-128-A
...is thus inapplicable to demonstrative or general testamentary gifts. 6 Page, supra § 54.3 at 245, § 54.5 at 248. In Haslam v. de Alvarez, 70 R.I. 212, 38 A.2d 158 (1944), we prescribed the criteria for determining the character of a legacy, relying on the earlier case of Dean v. Rounds, 18 ......
-
Norton-Children's Hospitals, Inc. v. First Kentucky Trust Co.
...33 A.2d 874 (1943); etc.), or a portion of specific property (In Re Babb's Estate, 200 Cal. 252, 252 P. 1039 (1927); Haslam v. De Alvarez, 70 R.I. 212, 38 A.2d 158 (1944); etc.) received from the estate of another. Under the Moorman will we have a bequest of a cash sum with but a reference ......
-
DiCristofaro v. Beaudry
...or a general devise, and hence, we must determine the issue in the light of her intention as best we can. Second, in Haslam v. de Alvarez, 70 R.I. 212, 38 A.2d 158 (1944), this court laid down guidelines for determining the character of legacies. There, we stated "A general legacy is one wh......