Robinson v. Robinson

• Citation: 72 A. 883,105 Me. 68
• Parties: ROBINSON et al. v. ROBINSON et al.
• Decision Date: 30 December 1908
• Court: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)

72 A. 883

105 Me. 68

ROBINSON et al.

v. ROBINSON et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Dec. 30, 1908.

(Official.)

Report from Supreme Judicial Court, Hancock County, in Equity.

Bill by Lydia M. B. Robinson and others as executors and trustees under the will of Mary D. Biddle, deceased, against Lydia M. B. Robinson and others as individuals, for the construction of the will of Mary D. Biddie, deceased. Case reported to the law court. Will construed.

Bill in equity brought by "Lydia M. B. Robinson, of Paoli, county of Chester, commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Christine W. Biddle, of Philadelphia, said commonwealth, Spencer F. B. Biddle, of Graham, state of Montana, and Henry J. Biddle, of Vancouver, state of Washington, as executors and trustees under the last will and testament of Mary D. Biddle, late of said Philadelphia," against "Lydia M. B. Robinson, Christine W. Biddle, Spencer F. B. Biddle, Henry J. Biddle as individuals, Lydia Spencer Moncure Robinson (daughter of Lydia M. B. Robinson), Spencer Biddle and Rebecca Biddle both of said Vancouver (minor children of Henry J. Biddle)," asking for the construction of the last will and testament of the said Mary D. Biddle.

In lieu of a formal answer to the bill the defendants filed the following agreement: "It is hereby agreed that the allegations of fact in complainants' bill are true and the respondents join in the prayer of complainants for a construction of the will of Mary D. Biddle."

When the cause came on for hearing before the justice of the first instance, it was agreed to report the case to the law court for determination.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Argued before EMERY, C. J., and SAVAGE. PEABODY, CORNISH, KING, and BIRD, JJ.

Edward B. Mears, for plaintiffs. Hale & Hamlin, for defendants.

BIRD, J. This bill in equity is brought by the executors and trustees under the will of Mary D. Biddle for the construction of the will.

The case comes before this court upon complainants' bill and an agreement of all the defendants wherein the allegations of fact in the bill of complainants are admitted to be true, and the respondents join in the prayer of the bill for the construction of the will. This agreement appears to be one which might properly be made by all parties respondent.

In brief, the bill sets out that Mary D. Biddle, late of Philadelphia, in the state of Pennsylvania, died on the 3d day of December, A. D. 1900, testate; that her will was duly admitted to probate at said Philadelphia, setting forth particularly the clause of which construction is requested; that the will was duly admitted to probate by the probate court of Hancock county, in this state, on the 5th day of April, A. D. 1904, and that letters testamentary were duly issued to complainants on the 20th day of said April and letters of trust on the 1st day of November, A. D. 1904; that the testatrix left her surviving four children, who are the complainants, no husband and three grandchildren, one of the latter being the daughter of Lydia M. B. Robidson and the others children of Henry J. Biddle; that all the specific bequests made by the will have been paid in full or otherwise provided for in accordance with its terms; that the only persons having any interest now in the estate of the testatrix are the complainants and the three grandchildren; that there are no debts against the estate, and that no personal property of any great value was left by testatrix in the state of Maine; that she died seised of certain real estate in the county of Hancock forming part of her residuary estate, and part of which is unimproved and unproductive of Income and now liable for taxes, for the payment of which no express provision is made under the will or afforded by the estate of the testatrix, except out of the income of said lands, whereby the interest of the present beneficiaries under the will are prejudiced, and that it would be beneficial to all of them if the real estate referred to could be sold by the executors and trustees, who believe that, by the true construction of said will, the testatrix gave and granted unto them full power and authority to convey all real estate, wheresoever situated, comprising any part of her residuary estate so as aforesaid devised in trust; and that, in the event of the sale of any said real estate, purchasers are likely to refuse to accept a deed from the executors and trustees until their power in the premises has been judicially determined.

The complainants particularly Inquire whether or no the executors and trustees have power to sell and convey in fee simple or otherwise the real estate in this state.

The will of Mary D. Biddle, after providing for sundry specific bequests, provides for the sale immediately or after the termination of life estates of certain improved property in Pennsylvania, with the instruction that the proceeds upon sale become part of her residuary estate. Then follows the clause of which construction is particularly required, and which, omitting immaterial portions, is as follows:

"I give, devise, and bequeath all the residue of my estate to my executors hereinafter named, in trust, however, to invest and manage the same, and to pay over the interest and income annually arising therefrom to my four children during their lives, in equal shares, without anticipation and free from any claims or demands of any of their creditors or of any other persons or person whomsoever * * *...