Rosenberger v. Rosenberger
Decision Date | 04 March 1946 |
Citation | 184 Va. 1024,37 S.E.2d 55 |
Parties | ROSENBERGER. v. ROSENBERGER et al. BROCK. v. SAME. |
Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
successive life tenants with remainder to a charity, and provided a residuary trust for same three life tenants, and codicil amended will by eliminating second life tenant with respect to farm providing for payment to her of $55 a month for life and that codicil should effect no change in rest of will, thereby leaving no fund from which monthly payments could be made, court properly construed will and codicil as giving to second life tenant, after death of first life tenant, $55 per month for life from income of trust prior to any payment therefrom to third life tenant; the monetary provision being substitutional and not cumulative.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Fairfax County; Paul E. Brown, Judge.
Suit by Lottie M. Rosenberger and the Lincoln National Bank of Washington, executors of the estate of Raphael A. Casilear, deceased, and the Lincoln National Bank of Washington, trustee under the will of Raphael A. Casilear,.deceased, against Viola Atlee Marston, infant, and others, for a construction of certain provisions of the will and codicil of deceased, and for other relief. From the decree Lottie M. Rosenberger, individually, and Dorothy M. Brock, separately appeal.
Affirmed.
Before CAMPBELL, C. J., and HOLT, HUDGINS, GREGORY, BROWNING, EGGLESTON, and SPRATLEY, JJ.
Frank L. Ball, of Arlington, for Lottie M. Rosenberger.
Lawrence W. Douglas, of Arlington, for Dorothy M. Brock.
Frank Stetson, of Washington, D. C, and Wilson M. Farr and Hardee Chambliss, Jr., both of Fairfax, for Washington City Orphan Asylum.
This cause was instituted by Lottie M. Rosenberger and the Lincoln National Bank of Washington, executors of the estate of Raphael A. Casilear, deceased, and the Lincoln National Bank of Washington, trustee under the will of Raphael A. Casilear, deceased, against Viola Atlee Marston, infant, Dorothy M. Brock, Washington City Orphan Asylum, a corporation, and Lottie M. Rosenberger, in her own right, for the purpose of having the court construe certain provisions of the will and codicil of Raphael A. Casilear and determine certain questions relative to the distribution of decedent's property. Answers were duly filed on behalf of each of the defendants.
Raphael A. Casilear, a resident of Fairfax county, Virginia, died testate on November 17, 1940. On September 22, 1941, his will, dated October 5, 1932, with a codicil thereto dated May 5, 1936, was admitted to probate, and Lottie M. Rosenberger and the Lincoln National Bank of Washington, the executors nominated therein, qualified as such on the same day, and immediately entered upon the performance of their duties.
So much of the will of Casilear as is pertinent to the proceedings under review is as follows:
First, he directed the payment of his just debts and funeral expenses, expressly authorizing the application of the proceeds of a life insurance policy in the sum of $2,000 towards the part payment thereof;
Secondly, he gave and bequeathed all moneys on deposit in any bank or trust company to his credit at the time of his death to Mrs. Rosenberger.
The next three paragraphs read as follows:
The next provision specifically granted the Lincoln National Bank of Washington full power and authority to carry out theintent and purpose of the above trust and to make final settlement.
The codicil is in the following language:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Newhall v. McGill
...519, 97 P.2d 202. 'Courts will assume that no testator intends to make conflicting provisions in his last will.' Rosenberger v. Rosenberger, 184 Va. 1024, 37 S.E.2d 55. 'It is a well-recognized rule that where an estate in fee is given in one clause of a will in clear and explicit terms, th......
-
Pitman v. Rutledge
...is to be construed as far as possible to harmonize with the provisions of the will. 2 Page on Wills, § 932; Rosenberger v. Rosenberger, 184 Va. 1024, 1041-2, 37 S.E.2d 55, 63. ''As a general thing, a codicil will be construed as operative upon some portions of the estate, even where its ter......
-
Muse v. Muse
...Missionary Society v. Crippled Children's Hospital, 163 Va. 114, at pages 134, 135, 176 S.E. 193. Also see Rosen-berger v. Rosenberger, 184 Va. 1024, at pages 1035, 1036, 37 S.E.2d 55, where many of the cases are collected and discussed. The General Assembly of 1947 has made statutory the r......
-
Shriners Hospital for Crippled Children v. Citizens Nat. Bank, Covington, Va., 4506
...also clear that the gift to appellants of such residue is likewise subject to the payment of these latter items. Rosenberger v. Rosenberger, 184 Va. 1024, 1038, 37 S.E.2d 55, 61. The testator next devises and bequeaths to the trustee bank 'All of the property * * * which under other clauses......