In re Wood
| Decision Date | 13 May 1907 |
| Citation | 67 A. 8,28 R.I. 290 |
| Parties | In re WOOD et al. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Petition under Court and Practice Act of 1905, § 323, for the construction of the will of Eunice B. Wood, deceased, by Henry P. Wood and others. Will construed.
Argued before DOUGLAS, C. J., and DUBOIS, BLODGETT, JOHNSON, and PARK-HURST, JJ.
Samuel W. K. Allen, for parties.
This is a petition brought under section 323 of the court and practice act of 1905, in which all the parties interested in the estate of Eunice B. Wood, late of Warwick, in the county of Kent, deceased, concur in requesting the construction of the will of said Eunice B. Wood, which has been admitted to probate by the probate court of said Warwick. The clause in regard to which doubts have arisen is as follows:
The opinion of the court is that the first sentence of this clause gave to Henry P. Wood the rest, residue, and remainder of the estate of the testatrix in fee simple absolute, and that the second sentence of said clause is void for repugnancy. It seems to us that the testatrix intended to give to her husband such absolute control over the estate as is inconsistent with the limitations of any less estate than a fee. The "use" of the estate might be enjoyed by a life tenant; but the full "benefit" thereof could not be taken "unconditionally" without power to sell or to convey by will. The words in the second sentence, "after him, should any remain," indicate a desire that, if Mr. Wood should not dispose in his lifetime of the whole estate, the residue left by him should go to the beneficiaries named; but this is not consistent with the testamentary power which is given to him, as it seems to us, by necessary implication. This particular intent of the testatrix must yield to her general intent as expressed in the first sentence. Bullock v. Waterman, etc., Society, 5 R. I. 273.
In Pierce v. Simmons, 16 R, I. 689, 19 Atl. 242, where very similar provisions in a will were construed by this court, it was doubted whether the second provision, attempting to dispose of "whatever shall or may remain," following a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chile v. Beck
...power of disposition was in the daughters and therefore the subsequent limitations were rendered repugnant and void. In Wood for an Opinion, 28 R.I. 290, 67 A. 8 (1907), the testatrix left her residuary estate to her husband "unconditionally," with any remainder after his death to the testa......
-
Wash. Trust Co. v. Arnold
...testator clearly intended to give an absolute and unconditional estate to the first taker. Thus in the case of Wood for an Opinion, 28 R.I. 290, 67 A. 8, 125 Am.St.Rep. 738, the first gift was to the testatrix' husband “to have the full use and benefit thereof unconditionally”, and the cour......
-
Barker v. Ashley
...in such manner as to give her a life estate with full power to dispose of the property during her life. The case of In re Wood, 28 R.I. 290, 67 A. 8, 125 Am.St.Rep. 738, which is relied on by the complainants and the guardian ad litem, was a petition for the construction of a will. There, i......
-
Indus. Trust Co. v. Pendleton
...case is not unlike such cases as Rhode Island Hospital Trust Co. v. City of Woonsocket, 48 R.I. 345, 137 A. 411, and In re Wood, 28 R.I. 290, 67 A. 8, 125 Am.St.Rep. 738. It is governed by the well-settled rule that ‘when words of the will in the first instance distinctly indicate an intent......