Megargee v. Naglee

• Decision Date: 05 May 1870
• Citation: 64 Pa. 216
• Parties: Megargee <I>versus</I> Naglee <I>et al.</I>
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Page 216

64 Pa. 216

Megargee versus Naglee et al.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

March 4, 1870.

May 5, 1870.

March 4th 1870.

Before READ, AGNEW and SHARSWOOD, JJ. THOMPSON, C. J., at Nisi Prius

Appeal from the decree of the Supreme Court at Nisi Prius: Of January Term 1870, No. 9 E. K. Price (with whom were E. H. Weil and J. Page), for appellants, referred to Catherwood's Appeal, 2 P. F. Smith 154, and Keyser's Appeal, 7 Id. 236 decisions in the same estate. This trust is executed: Lewin on Trusts 246; Williams on Real Prop. 135; Dubs v. Dubs, 7 Casey 155; Physick's Appeal, 14 Wright 128; Kepple's Appeal, 3 P. F. Smith 212. If not executed, it ceased on discoverture: Nice's Appeal, 14 Wright 143; Steacy v. Rice, 3 Casey 75; Ralston v. Waln, 8 Wright 279; Koenig's Appeal, 7 P. F. Smith 352; 2 Crabb on Real Prop., § 963; Smith v. Starr, 3 Whart. 62; Hamersley v. Smith, 4 Id. 126; Quigley v. Com., 4 Harris 353.

J. E. Gowen, for appellees.—The trustees had active duties to perform, and the trust was therefore unexecuted: Barnett's Appeal, 10 Wright 392; Shankland's Appeal, 11 Id. 113; Bacon's Appeal, 7 P. F. Smith 504; Keyser's Appeal, supra.

The opinion of the court was delivered, May 5th 1870, by AGNEW, J.

This is a bill in equity, praying for a conveyance of the estate in the defendants as trustees on the alleged expiration of the trust at the death of the plaintiff's husband. A decree dismissing the bill pro forma was made at Nisi Prius, in order that the case might reach the court in banc. But one question is involved, and that is, whether the trust created for Mrs. Megargee during coverture, by her father John Naglee, in his last will, has fallen by the death of her husband Samuel Megargee. It seems to us very clear that the active trust vested in the joint board of trustees of the sons and daughters for the improvement of the estate, and its partition, ceased after the term fixed for the performance of these duties had expired and the partition made. Thenceforth there was nothing to keep alive the trust for the daughters, except so far as the will created a special trust for them as married women to preserve their estates and protect them from their husbands and from the creditors of their husbands. The devise and bequest in the eighth clause in trust for the daughters are clearly of a fee in the realty, and an absolute estate in the personalty. A continuance of the special trust, after the death of the husband of any daughter, would be clearly at variance with the absolute estate thus vested in her. Being no longer necessary for the protection of the daughter, the trust falls, and she is entitled to receive the estate into her own hands as its owner, with all the incidents of ownership. In Bacon's Appeal the trust was for the daughter for life, and being an active one, the estate in her was merely...