Meegan v. Brennan

• Decision Date: 24 July 1939
• Docket Number: No. 1462.,1462.
• Parties: MEEGAN et al. v. BRENNAN.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

7 A.2d 663

MEEGAN et al.

v. BRENNAN.

No. 1462.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

July 24, 1939.

Certified from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties.

Proceeding in equity to construe a will by Katharine T. Meegan and others against Edward M. Brennan, administrator c. t. a. On certified questions.

Judgment in part for complainants and in part for respondent.

Cooney & Nolan, of Providence, for complainants.

Brennan & Johnson and Edward M. Brennan, all of Providence, for respondent.

FLYNN, Chief Justice.

This is a bill in equity for the construction of the will of John F. Gartland, deceased, and was heard before a justice of the superior court on the bill of complaint, answer, replication and evidence. The cause, being ready for hearing for final decree, was then certified to this court for determination under the provisions of General Laws 1923, chapter 339, sec. 35. The complainants are cousins of the testator, and the respondent is the duly appointed administrator, c.t.a, of the deceased's estate. The testator's wife was dead and he had no child, ancestors, brothers or sisters living at the time of his death. The respondent presented before us arguments in favor of the claims of any who might have interests adverse to the complainants in this proceeding.

The will in question was written by the testator himself and reads as follows:

"The Property at 249 Union Ave. and all things inside same are to be for Kate and May Meegan as joint tenants while they live and no one is to put them out of same, after their death it is to go to Tom Meegan forever for great kindness to my wife Mary Gartland and me.

"Signed on July 15 1937 while in full possession of my sences

"John F. Gartland "Witnessed by Mrs. John Carey

"Johanna Ysrowitz".

The bill alleges and the evidence discloses clearly that "Kate and May Meegan" referred to in the will are respectively Katharine T. Meegan and Mary W. Meegan, first cousins of the testator, who are two of the complainants; and that "Tom Meegan" referred to in the will was intended by the testator to mean Thomas F. Meegan, Jr., a second cousin, rather than his father, Thomas F. Meegan, Sr., both of whom are also complainants. The last identification is further confirmed by the specific disclaimer in the bill of complaint by said Thomas F. Meegan, Sr. of any right to share, as a beneficiary, under the terms of the will in question. The testator died August 3, 1938 and the will was duly allowed for probate by a decree of the probate court of Providence, and no appeal was taken therefrom. Unless otherwise stated, reference hereinafter to the complainants shall mean Katharine T. and Mary W. Meegan.

The three questions that are certified by these proceedings are substantially: First, whether a life estate in said real estate was devised to Katharine T. and Mary W. Meegan as joint tenants, with remainder in fee to Thomas F. Meegan, Jr.; second, whether the balance of account No. 381554 in the Providence Institution for Savings was bequeathed to said Katharine T. Meegan and Mary W. Meegan, or whether it belongs to the respondent as administrator to be distributed as intestate property in accordance with law; third, if said Katharine T. Meegan and Mary W. Meegan are legatees of the balance of said account, whether they may have and retain jointly only the interest on said fund or may also have the principal or any part thereof.

The first question raised is whether a life estate in the described property was devised by said will to complainants Katharine T. Meegan and Mary W. Meegan as joint tenants with remainder in fee to complainant Thomas F. Meegan, Jr. It is a primary rule in the construction of wills that the intention of the testator, if definitely ascertainable and lawful, must govern and that such intention must be ascertained, if possible, from a consideration of the whole will; and it is also well settled that evidence of the circumstances surrounding the testator and existing at the time of the execution of a will may be considered as an aid in ascertaining that intention. Gould v. Trenberth, R.I., 199 A. 696; Buffington v. Work, R.I., 200 A. 541, 543; Billings v. Gladding, 58 R.I. 218, 220, 192 A. 216; Edwards v. Martin, 54 R.I. 64, 169 A. 751; Howard for an Opinion, 52 R.I. 170, 159 A. 143.

Applying the general rules of construction, approved in those cases, to the will in question and the evidence in the transcript, there can be little doubt of the character of the estates intended to be devised by the will, once the beneficiaries have been identified. The evidence being undisputed as to such identifications, we are of the opinion that the testator intended by the terms thereof to devise to the complainants Katharine T. and Mary W. Meegan, as joint tenants, a life estate in the described property with remainder over, in fee, to the complainant Thomas F. Meegan, Jr.

The second question certified is whether the balance of bank account No. 381554 in the Providence Institution for Savings, standing at the testator's death in the names of himself and Marion Fowler and payable to either or to the survivor, was bequeathed by this will to the complainants Katharine T. and Mary W. Meegan. These complainants contend that the will made a valid gift of this bank account to them jointly because the bankbook evidencing this account was inside the testator's described property at the time of his death and therefore must be included in the gift of "...