Sanborn v. Clough
| Citation | 64 N.H. 315,10 A. 678 |
| Parties | SANBORN, Ex'r. v. CLOUGH and others. |
| Decision Date | 15 July 1887 |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
64 N.H. 315
SANBORN, Ex'r.
v.
CLOUGH and others.1
Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Rockingham.
July 15, 1887.
Reserved case from Rockingham county; BINGHAM, J., presiding.
Bill in equity, asking for a construction of the will of Albion W. Bailey. The will, executed May 18, 1885, disposes of all his personal property, except certain money legacies, as follows: "Fifth. After the payment of all my just
debts and funeral charges, and the expense of a proper set of grave-stones, I order and direct the rest and residue of all my money, in banks, stocks, and bonds, to be paid to Arthur W. Evans, son of Charles A. Evans, of Kensington, N. H., for his own; but not until said Arthur W. Evans shall have become of age, (21 years of age,) prior to which time, should occasion demand, I order this bequest to be held by my executor for said Arthur W. Evans at his maturity. Sixth. I give and bequeath to my nephew La Roy S. Clough all my personal property, (not including money in banks, stocks, and bonds,) and the income of my farm, and all my real estate, by his paying the taxes, and keeping up suitable repairs thereon, for his during his life." The testator died in June, 1886. The legatee Evans is 11 years of age. The testator's personal estate, at his decease, consisted in money on hand, railroad stocks, deposits in savings banks, and bonds, (including $28 in several coupons.) The questions submitted are: (1) From what fund shall debts, legacies, funeral charges, expenses of administration, and grave-stones be paid? (2) How and to whom shall the income of the fund mentioned in the fifth clause of the will be paid,—during the minority of Arthur W. Evans, or shall the income be allowed to accumulate during that period?
A. O. Fuller, for Evans.
The pecuniary legacies, expenses of administration, debts, funeral charges, etc., should be paid from property not specifically bequeathed. Gen. Laws, c. 203, § 13; 2 Redf. Wills, 873. No contrary intention is indicated by the words, "after the payment of all my just debts," etc. They merely direct the performance of a duty the law would enforce without them. The bequest to Arthur W. Evans in the fifth clause is specific. 2 Redf. Wills, 459. And the bequest to Clough in the sixth clause is residuary. The income of the fund mentioned in the fifth clause should be paid to the guardian of Arthur W. Evans. This legacy is vested. 1 Rob. Wills, (3d Ed.) 209; Pinney v. Fancher, 3 Bradf. 198; Furness v. Fox, 1 Cush. 134; Prest. Leg. *66, *99; Woodman v. Madigan, 58 N. H. 6; Howland v. Howland, 100 Mass. 222.
Marston & Eastman, for Clough.
The testator's intention must prevail. 1 Jarm. Wills, 33, note; Hall v. Chaffee, 14 N. H. 215. He intended that the charges should be paid out of his money in banks, stocks, and bonds, and that the residue...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Will of Zophar M. Mansur
...Austin v. Bristol, 40 Conn. 120, 16 A. R. 23, Harrison v. Moore, 64 Conn. 344, 30 A. 55; Brown v. Brown, 44 N.H. 281; Sanborn v. Clough, 64 N.H. 315, 10 A. 678; Zartman v. Ditmars, 37 A.D. 173, 55 N.Y.S. 908; Goebel v. Wolf, 113 N.Y. 405, 21 N.E. 388, 10 A. S. R. 464; Williams v. Boul, 101 ......
-
In re Mansur's Will
...v. Bristol, 40 Conn. 120, 16 Am. Rep. 23; Harrison v. Moore, 64 Conn. 344, 30 A. 55; Brown v. Brown, 44 N. H. 281; Sanborn v. Clough, 64 N. H. 315, 10 A. 678; Zartman v. Ditmars, 37 App, Div. 173, 55 N. Y. S. 908; Goebel v. Wolf, 113 N. Y. 405, 21 N. E. 388, 10 Am. St. Rep. 464; Williams v.......
-
Carter v. Whitcomb
...the death of the testatrix or upon the probate of the will (Brown v. Brown, 44 N. H. 281; Ordway v. Dow, 55 N. H. 11; Sanborn v. Clough, 64 N. H. 315, 10 Atl. 678), there is little ground for holding, in the absence of express language to that effect, that the Legislature intended the amend......
-
Segal's Estate, In re
...pass the fee. Brown v. Eastman, 72 N.H. 356, 358, 57 A. 96.' Grant v. Nelson, 100 N.H. 220, 221, 122 A.2d 925, 926. See Sanborn v. Clough, 64 N.H. 315, 320, 10 A. 678. But it is familiar law that the clauses in a will are not read in isolation and their meaning is to be determined from the ......