Hollister v. Butterworth
Decision Date | 26 July 1898 |
Citation | 40 A. 1044,71 Conn. 57 |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Parties | HOLLISTER v. BUTTERWORTH. |
Case reserved from superior court, New Haven county; William T. Elmer, Judge.
Suit by John C. Hollister, administrator, against George F. Butterworth, executor, and others, to determine the validity and construction of the will of Jeannette A. Strong, deceased. Reservation to the supreme court of errors.
Action by an administrator cum testamento annexo for the construction of the will, reserved for the advice of this court on the complaint and answers. The will was that of Jeannette A. Strong, of New Haven, made in 1845, and proved in 1857. The material part of it read as follows: The testatrix, her daughter, who had married Theodorus Bailey, and the son-in-law, all perished at sea, in a common disaster, November 3, 1856. Mrs. Bailey left no surviving issue. Charles E. Strong survived his mother, and had an only child born in 1851, who was married to Arthur Nelson Welman in 1878. By an antenuptial settlement, she had conveyed all her property in trust, under which Henry C. White was, in 1898, the sole trustee. Charles B. Strong died in 1897, leaving a will in which he made provision for his widow and daughter, giving the latter a power of appointment as to the residue, with remainder to a hospital in the event of her death intestate without issue and without exercising the power.
The questions of construction submitted were as follows: (a) Is there any presumption, upon the facts stated, that Jeannette A. Strong survived her daughter, Julia Weeks Bailey? (b) Is there any presumption, upon the facts stated, that said Julia Weeks Bailey survived her mother, Jeannette A. Strong? (c) Is there any presumption, upon the facts stated, that they both died at the same moment of time? (d) Upon the facts stated, are the property rights of the parties in the estate of Jeannette A. Strong to be determined as if both she and her daughter died at the same time? (e) Does the phrase in the second part of said will, "die without such children or their issue surviving her," refer solely to the death of the daughter before the death of her mother? (f) Under...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hartford-Conn. Trust Co. v. Lawrence
...It has no application where the prior estate is one for life in A. with remainder to B. Hollister, Adm'r, v. Butterworth, Ex'r, et al., 71 Conn. 57, 40 A. 1044. The bequest in article third and the bequests and devises in article fourth (f) were substitutionary gifts, and took effect in the......
-
In re Clifton's Estate
...(28 L. Ed. 816);Guilford v. Gardner, 180 Iowa, 1210, 1220, 162 N. W. 261;Jordan v. Hinkle, 111 Iowa, 43, 82 N. W. 426;Hollister v. Butterworth, 71 Conn. 57, 40 A. 1044;Summers v. Smith, 127 Ill. 645, 21 N. E. 191;Mullarky v. Sullivan, 136 N. Y. 227, 32 N. E. 762;Hutchins v. Pearce. 80 Md. 4......
-
Ewart v. Dalby
...418; Naylor v. Godman, 109 Mo. 543; Trust Co. v. Carby, 255 Mo. 410; King v. King, 215 Ill. 100; In re Denton, 137 N.Y. 428; Hollister v. Butterworth, 71 Conn. 57; Chesterfield v. Hopkins, 133 Wis. 368; Mayer v. Walker, 214 Pa. 214; White v. White's Guar., 168 Ky. 752; Cook v. Collier, 62 S......
-
Hartford-Connecticut Trust Co. v. Lawrence
... ... prior to the testator's death. It has no ... application where the prior estate is one for life in A. with ... remainder to B. Hollister, Adm'r, v. Butterworth, ... Ex'r, et al., 71 Conn. 57, 40 A. 1044. The bequest ... in article third and the bequests and devises in article ... ...