In re Snyder's Estate, 91

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM:
Citation118 A. 609,274 Pa. 574
PartiesSnyder Estate
Docket Number91
Decision Date24 June 1922

118 A. 609

274 Pa. 574

Snyder Estate

No. 91

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

June 24, 1922

Argued: May 11, 1922

Appeal, No. 91, Oct. T., 1922, by Mary Snyder Drew, from decree of O.C. Allegheny Co., June T., 1921, No. 415, overruling exceptions to order appointing trustee ad litem in Estate of William P. Snyder, deceased. Affirmed.

Exceptions to order appointing trustee ad litem. Before TRIMBLE, J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Exceptions dismissed. Mary Snyder Drew, decedent's daughter, appealed.

Error assigned, inter alia, was decree, quoting it.

The order is affirmed at cost of appellants.

John C. Bane, for appellant. -- The order was a pronounced abuse of judicial discretion. It was made without notice, and without argument or opportunity for argument by counsel. It was made without petition, citation, motion, request or hearing.

A. J. Barron, with him Geo. E. Alter, trustee ad litem, appellee.


OPINION [118 A. 610]

[274 Pa. 575] PER CURIAM:

Mary Snyder Drew, appellant here, petitioned the orphans' court, in the estate of her father, William P. Snyder, deceased, for the allowance of an appeal from the decision of the register of wills, admitting to probate certain writings, as the will of the decedent, with a codicil thereto; she asked that the probate be set aside and the letters testamentary revoked, also for an issue devisavit vel non and general relief, alleging that, at the dates of these writings, decedent was without testamentary capacity, by reason of long-continued illness and feebleness of mind. One of the respondents admitted the truth of all the averments in the petition, and the answers of the others categorically denied those alleging want of testamentary capacity.

At hearing, it developed that several of the parties in interest were minors, represented by guardians ad litem; that the will contained a separate use, spendthrift trust and other trusts to support remainders for unascertained persons, also a charitable bequest to a church; and that the widow of testator, named as one of the trustees, had elected to take against his will.

In support of the averments in her petition, appellant introduced the testimony of a large number of witnesses, none of whom were cross-examined by counsel for respondents, who stated to the court: "We have nothing to offer in defense, and, . . . in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Petition of Kariher
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • November 23, 1925
    ...having a possible interest were joined as respondents, 131 A. 267 including certain alleged remaindermen and a trustee (Snyder's Est., 274 Pa. 574, 118 A. 609) appointed to represent other possible contingent remaindermen and persons who might in the future possess an alternative interest. ......
  • Kariher's Petition, 146
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • November 23, 1925
    ...the appointment of trustees to represent contingent interests, all persons in interest are represented in the proceeding: Snyder's Est., 274 Pa. 574; Moorehead v. Wolff, 123 Pa. 365. The orphans' court has jurisdiction: Cardon's Est., 278 Pa. 153; Souder's App., 57 Pa. 498; Winton's App., 9......
  • Snyder's Estate
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • January 7, 1924
    ...This is a second appeal in a will contest; on the first one we simply affirmed the court below for ordering a rehearing: Snyder's Est., 274 Pa. 574. Much testimony was then produced by appellant, who is decedent's only daughter, and by proponents. In a masterly opinion, the trial judge revi......
  • Browne v. Maxwell, 165
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • February 7, 1927
    ...are not in a position to act disinterestedly, for the protection of testamentary interests involved in the litigation: see Snyder's Est., 274 Pa. 574, 576. The order appealed from is affirmed at cost of appellant. ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT