Moeckel v. Ludwig

• Decision Date: 18 January 1933
• Citation: 164 A. 690
• Parties: MOECKEL v. LUDWIG et al.
• Court: New Jersey Court of Chancery

164 A. 690

MOECKEL

v. LUDWIG et al.

Court of Chancery of New Jersey.

Jan. 18, 1933.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Testimony as to the situation and circumstances of a testatrix are admissible to show the meaning attached by the testatrix to the words used by her in her will.

2. Where construction of her will is doubtful, that construction will be given which enables the entire will to be carried into effect.

3. Where there is a release in general terms followed by a restrictive release, the general release will not be given full effect, but will be limited to the provisions of the restriction, if from the balance of the instrument it appears that the release was intended to be confined to such restriction.

4. The terms of a will construed, and held, that a provision therein to cancel any and all indebtedness, and especially a certain debt, did not cancel two certain mortgages, since it clearly appears from the circumstances of testatrix' estate and the other provisions in the will it was not her intention to cancel the mortgages.

Suit by William John Mocekel against John Ludwig and another, executors of the last will and testament of Minnie Marie Giegold, deceased, and others.

Decree dismissing the bill of complaint.

George E. Carpenter, of Newark, for complainant.

Eichmann & Seiden, of Jersey City, for defendants.

LEWIS, Vice Chancellor.

The construction of the will of Minnie Marie Giegold is sought in this suit. Testatrix at the time of her death held a mortgage of complainant in the amount of $5,000. The question at issue is as to whether by the second paragraph of her will she canceled this mortgage.

The second paragraph of the will reads as follows: "I hereby cancel, annul and forgive any and all indebtedness to me, especially that sum of four thousand five hundred ($4,500.00) dollars which I advanced to my beloved sister, Selma Ludwig, who has since departed this life and which said advance and loan was made by me to her on or about October 15th, 1924 in the sum of four thousand five hundred ($4,500.00) dollars and I do order and direct my said executors to give a release or such other instrument as may be necessary to cancel and discharge the said obligation and that this order and direction by me made shall cancel the recital set forth in a certain deed made by John Ludwig, et als., dated June 20th, 1925, and recorded in the office of the Register of the County of Hudson, on August 4th, 1925, in Book 1571 of Deeds for said County, at page 349, and which said deed was made to Charles Sanders and subsequently the said Charles Sanders and Lilly Sanders, his wife, did convey the said premises to me by deed dated July 20th, 1925, and recorded in the Register's office of the County of Hudson on August 4th, 1925, in Book 1571 of Deeds for the County of Hudson at page 351, and the premises as and by the street numbers 913 and 915 Savoye Street, in the Township of North Bergen, in the County of Hudson and State of New Jersey."

By other clauses in the will testatrix bequeathed $200 for maintenance of a cemetery lot, her diamond earrings, automobile, and certain household furnishings to two nephews, and made money bequests to various other relatives aggregating $5,500. Among them was one of $2,500 to complainant and one of $1,000 to her brother Adolph Moeckel. She also devised her home to her nephews. Outside of her home her estate consisted...