Knight v. Knight, No. 1388.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Writing for the CourtMOSS, Justice.
Citation200 A. 431
PartiesKNIGHT v. KNIGHT.
Docket NumberNo. 1388.
Decision Date30 June 1938
200 A. 431

KNIGHT
v.
KNIGHT.

No. 1388.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

June 30, 1938.


200 A. 432

Certified from Superior Court, Kent County.

Suit in equity by Hazel L. Knight against Albina Knight for the construction of a will of Willard W. Knight, deceased, and for determination of what interests or estates were devised and bequeathed to the complainant and respondent respectively. When the pleadings were closed, there being no issues of fact between the parties, the suit being ready for hearing for final decree was certified to the Supreme Court for determination.

Decree in accordance with opinion.

Joseph R. McKanna, of West Warwick, for complainant. Grim & Littlefield and Benjamin W. Grim, all of Providence, for respondent.

MOSS, Justice.

&gt

This is a suit in equity brought by the daughter of Willard W. Knight, who at the time of his death was a resident of this state and left a will that was duly admitted to probate. The suit was brought against his widow as executrix and also as a devisee and legatee under the will; and the prayer of the amended bill of complaint is that the will be construed, and that it be determined what interests or estates were devised and bequeathed to the complainant and respondent respectively. When the pleadings were closed, there being no issues of fact between the parties, the suit, being ready for hearing for final decree, was certified to this court for determination, under General Laws 1923, chapter 339, sec. 35.

The second clause of the will is the only one the construction of which is sought. It is claimed by the respondent that the language of the first clause, just because it contains a bequest of $1000 to the complainant, supports the respondent's contention that under the second clause the complainant received no valid estate or interest in the property of the testator. We cannot see any merit in that claim; and therefore now quote only the second clause, as follows: "Second—I give to my wife Albina Knight the rest and residue of my Estate both personal and real of any name or nature whatsoever. That I may die seized or possessed of, or entitled to at the time of my decease. To her full control to sell, exchange, and reinvest as she may see fit. To use all she desires or needs for her maintenance, or care, and to render no account of the same, and to give no bonds as to its use or control so that she may in no way be incumbered as to the use of it. And at the death of my wife the remainder to become the property of my daughter Hazel L. Knight."

The contention of the widow is that by the first part of that clause, including all of it except the last sentence, she is given an absolute title to the residue of the estate, both real and personal; and that the last sentence, purporting to provide that on the death of the widow the remainder shall become the property of the daughter, is repugnant to the first part of the clause and is therefore null and void.

There is no doubt, and indeed the daughter admits, that the doctrine of repugnancy is in force in this state. But she contends that as there are no words of inheritance or of absolute gift in the former part of the clause, and as it is quite...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Jorge v. da Silva, No. 1-83
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island
    • April 20, 1966
    ...has been the basis for a holding that the principal may be consumed before it reaches the remainderman is Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431. There, in addition to other language evidencing a primary purpose to provide for the life tenant at the expense of the remainder interest, the......
  • Wash. Trust Co. v. Arnold, No. 1639.
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • March 29, 1943
    ...of testamentary construction and is supported in principle by the cases of Billings v. Gladding, supra, and Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431, although the wills in those cases contained no technical words of limitation, as here. However, if it were necessary, because of respondent'......
  • Millman v. Streeter, No. 1541.
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1941
    ...a gift or to dispose of such jewelry except for such purposes. Gardner v. Whitford, 23 R.I. 396, SO A. 642; Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431. Apparently the respondent did not raise the issue, and we do not decide, whether such articles of jewelry formerly belonging to Mrs. Smith w......
  • Indus. Trust Co. v. Pendleton, No. 1681.
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • January 22, 1945
    ...realty and an absolute gift of the personalty, unless elsewhere in the will a contrary intention appears. Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431. Such a contrary intention to give less than the whole estate of which the testator was seized must appear distinctly and with reasonable certa......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Jorge v. da Silva, No. 1-83
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island
    • April 20, 1966
    ...has been the basis for a holding that the principal may be consumed before it reaches the remainderman is Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431. There, in addition to other language evidencing a primary purpose to provide for the life tenant at the expense of the remainder interest, the......
  • Wash. Trust Co. v. Arnold, No. 1639.
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • March 29, 1943
    ...of testamentary construction and is supported in principle by the cases of Billings v. Gladding, supra, and Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431, although the wills in those cases contained no technical words of limitation, as here. However, if it were necessary, because of respondent'......
  • Millman v. Streeter, No. 1541.
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1941
    ...a gift or to dispose of such jewelry except for such purposes. Gardner v. Whitford, 23 R.I. 396, SO A. 642; Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431. Apparently the respondent did not raise the issue, and we do not decide, whether such articles of jewelry formerly belonging to Mrs. Smith w......
  • Indus. Trust Co. v. Pendleton, No. 1681.
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • January 22, 1945
    ...realty and an absolute gift of the personalty, unless elsewhere in the will a contrary intention appears. Knight v. Knight, 61 R.I. 187, 200 A. 431. Such a contrary intention to give less than the whole estate of which the testator was seized must appear distinctly and with reasonable certa......
  • 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