Schapiro v. Howard
Decision Date | 23 June 1910 |
Citation | 78 A. 58,113 Md. 360 |
Parties | SCHAPIRO v. HOWARD et al. SAFE DEPOSIT & TRUST CO. OF BALTIMORE v. |
Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Two Appeals from Circuit Court, Anne Arundel County; Jas. R Brashears, Judge.
Bill by Margaret W. Schapiro against Elizabeth W. Howard and others. A petition in the nature of a supplemental bill was filed by the Safe Deposit & Trust Company of Baltimore, and from the decree said Schapiro and the Safe Deposit & Trust Company enter separate appeals. Reversed as to said Schapiro and affirmed as to the company.
Argued before BOYD, C.J., and BRISCOE, PEARCE, BURKE, THOMAS, and URNER, JJ.
Charles McH. Howard, for Safe Deposit & Trust Co. of Baltimore.
John B Deming, for appellees.
D. K Este Fisher, for Schapiro.
The two appeals, embraced in this record are from a decree of the circuit court for Anne Arundel county in equity, construing the will of John J. Hopkins, deceased, who was a resident of that county at the time of his death.
The questions presented arise upon a petition filed in a case in said court of Mary M. Harding v. Elizabeth W. Howard et al., by the Safe Deposit & Trust Company of Baltimore, as trustee under the will of said John J. Hopkins, and also as trustee under the will of Lavinia Hopkins and as trustee under two deeds, one from Margaret W. Schapiro, and one from Samuel H. Mercer, by the decree passed March 10, 1896, in the original cause above mentioned. The Safe Deposit & Trust Company of Baltimore was appointed trustee to receive from Lewis N. Hopkins, executor of said John J. Hopkins, an invested fund of about $9,000 to hold the same for the use of Elizabeth W. Howard, the widow of John J. Hopkins, for her life, and for distribution after her death, to those held to be entitled under his will, and since the passage of said decree the said trust has been administered in that court. The will of John J. Hopkins is as follows, being transcribed in full:
in any manner whatever the same may be obtained, to be held by her, my said wife, Elizabeth W. Hopkins, during her natural life, she to have sole control of my said estate without let or hindrance from any person or persons whomsoever; and in the event of my said wife having any child or children at the time of her death, I will and devise the whole of said estate to said child or children, equally to be divided, if more than one. But in the event of my said wife dying without issue living, then and in that case I devise and bequeath all said estate to my heirs at law.
Elizabeth W. Hopkins, after the death of her husband, remarried, and died Elizabeth W. Howard, Oct. 14, 1909, without having had issue by either marriage, and the estate of John J. Hopkins, being the fund above mentioned, is now to be distributed to the parties entitled under his will.
His heirs at law answering to that description at the time of his death were his brother, Mahlon Hopkins, and his sister, Ella W. Mercer. Mahlon Hopkins died without issue in 1879 leaving a will by which he devised and bequeathed all his estate to his mother, Lavinia Hopkins, who died in 1884, leaving a will by which she devised and bequeathed the residue of her estate to the Safe Deposit & Trust Company upon certain trusts declared in said will. This will was construed by this court in Marshall v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 101 Md. 1, 60 A. 476, where it was held that one-twelfth part of said residue vested in Marie Henriette Mercer, widow of Samuel H. Mercer; five twenty-fourths in Charles H. Harding, executor and residuary legatee of Mary M. Harding, and the remaining seventeen twenty-fourths in the Safe Deposit & Trust Company, under a deed of trust made to it from Margaret W. Schapiro. Ella W. Mercer died in 1879 leaving a will by which she did not attempt to dispose of any interest she might be supposed to have under the will of John J. Hopkins, and leaving two sons, Samuel H. Mercer and George D. Mercer, and two daughters, Mary, wife of Charles H. Harding, and Margaret, now the widow of Salo Schapiro, all of whom except Margaret Schapiro died before Elizabeth W. Howard. George D. Mercer died without issue in 1887 leaving a will by which he devised and bequeathed all his property to his wife Jennie W. Mercer, now Jennie Mercer Lake. Samuel H. Mercer died in 1897 leaving a will by which he devised and bequeathed all his property to his wife, Marie Henriette Mercer. Before his death, however, he had executed a deed of trust to Lewis N. Hopkins, and on the death of Lewis N. Hopkins, and on the death of Lewis N. Hopkins, the Safe Deposit & Trust Company was duly appointed trustee in his place. Margaret Schapiro and her husband in 1899 made a deed of trust to the Safe Deposit & Trust Company of all her property and estate in Maryland, "whether in possession, reversion, or expectancy, *** including all of her right, title, interest, and estate, both at law and in equity in and to that portion of the estate of John J. Hopkins, deceased, which under his will or otherwise, is now or may be hereafter vested in the said Margaret Schapiro as one of the heirs at law of said testator."
If the date of Mrs. Howard's death without issue is the date at which the heirs entitled to this estate are to be ascertained, then Mrs. Schapiro is the only person answering that description, and is solely entitled. If, however, the date to be taken for that purpose is the death of John J. Hopkins, then Mahlon Hopkins and Ella W. Mercer were the only persons answering that description; if the words "heirs at law" are to be construed in their ordinary sense, or if they are to be construed as "next of kin" in consequence of the admitted conversion of the property into personality under the will, then Mahlon Hopkins, Ella W. Mercer, and Lavinia Hopkins, were the three persons answering that description; the shares so vesting in either aspect of the case, passing to the beneficiaries of the heirs at law, or next of kin, under the various wills, deeds, and devolutions of title before mentioned.
All persons possibly interested in the estate upon any theory were made parties and have answered admitting the necessity of a construction of the will and the case was heard upon the petition and answers, and an agreed statement admitting all matters and facts alleged in the petition and not denied in the answers, without however admitting any statement as to the construction or legal effect of any instrument referred to.
The court below was of opinion that the words "heirs at law" must be construed as "next of kin," but no one prejudiced by the decision upon that point has appealed, and both the appellants agree that the question is not material. The court below held that the estate vested immediately upon the death of John J. Hopkins, in equal shares in his mother Lavinia Hopkins and his brother ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Courtenay v. Courtenay
... ... Mercantile ... Trust Co., 102 Md. 658, 62 A. 814; Shreve v ... Shreve, 43 Md. 393; Zimmerman v. Hafer, 81 Md ... 352, 32 A. 316; Schapiro v. Howard, 113 Md. 360, 78 ... A. 58, 140 Am. St. Rep. 414; Farmer v. Quinn, ... ...