Ogle v. Reynolds

• Citation: 23 A. 137,75 Md. 145
• Parties: OGLE ET AL. v. REYNOLDS ET AL.
• Decision Date: 17 December 1891
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

23 A. 137

75 Md. 145

OGLE ET AL. v. REYNOLDS ET AL.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

December 17, 1891

Appeal from orphans' court of Baltimore city.

To the ratification of the report of sale of real estate made by Charles Ogle and Mary Jane des Forges, executors of Harriet A. Hayden, exceptions were filed by Patrick Reynolds and Augustus C. P. Boehme. From a decision sustaining the exceptions the executors appeal. Reversed.

Argued before ALVEY, C.J., and IRVING, MCSHERRY, FOWLER, BRYAN, and ROBINSON, JJ.

M Sonnehill, for appellants.

James McColgan and C. D. Barnitz, for appellees.

ROBINSON J.

The fourth clause of the will of the testatrix, out of which this controversy arises, is as follows: " Fourthly. I will and bequeath my several groundrents arising and payable out of the lots on the west side of North Eutaw street as follows, that is to say: First. The one at the corner of Eutaw and Biddle street to pay my funeral expenses and a tomb for Captain Hayden and myself. Second. The next or second ground-rent to be used to buy and put up a tomb for my father and mother Ogle, and James and Elizabeth Hayden. Third. The next or third ground-rent is to be used for the same purposes as herein in this last clause mentioned if the other two ground-rents should prove insufficient for the purpose." The fourth ground-rent she devises to the building fund of Saint Luke's Mission of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and about which there is no controversy. Under this clause, the executors named in the will sold the reversionary in terest of the executrix in the three lots of ground out of which the rents issued, the total amount of sales being $1,900. The sales were reported by them to the orphans' court, to the ratification of which exceptions were filed by the purchasers. The questions arising upon these exceptions are: First. Did the testatrix mean that the reversionary interest in these lots should be sold and the proceeds arising from the sale be applied to the purposes mentioned in this clause, or did she mean that the annual rents themselves should be so applied? And, secondly, if the reversionary interest was to be sold, did she mean that the executors should make the sale? The answer to these questions depends upon the intention of the testatrix, and this intention is to be ascertained from the construction of the clause itself, taken in connection with the other clauses in the will, and the circumstances under which the will was made. The testatrix was a widow without any children, and was at the time of her death seised and possessed of valuable real and personal property. In the first clause she directs her executors to sell her house and lot on Pennsylvania avenue, and to distribute the proceeds of sale among certain nephews and nieces therein named. In the second she directs her executors to sell her leasehold property, No. 87 Green street, and to distribute the proceeds between her three brothers and sisters. In the third she directs her executors to sell her interest in the country place known as "The Widners," and the proceeds of sale she bequeaths to her brothers and sisters for life, and upon their death to their children. The fourth is the one out of which this litigation has arisen. In the fifth and sixth clauses she gives all her furniture and clothing and personal effects to her three sisters, with the exception of her gold watch, which she gives to her nephew John Francis Hayden. She then appoints her brother Charles Ogle and her sister Mary Jane des Forges, executors. She thus disposes of her entire property, real and personal, including her clothing; and it is clear beyond...