Spindle v. Shreve

Decision Date05 May 1884
Citation111 U.S. 542,28 L.Ed. 512,4 S.Ct. 522
PartiesSPINDLE, Assignee, etc., v. SHREVE and others. 1
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Gwynn Garnett, for appellant.

L. M. Shreve and Emery A. Storrs, for appellees.

MATTHEWS, J.

This is a bill in equity, filed by the appellant as assignee in bankruptcy of Charles U. Shreve, to subject an equitable interest in certain real estate, situated in Chicago, and its rents, issues, and profits, alleged to be the property of the bankrupt, and assets belonging to his estate. The appeal was from a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity. The question to be determined arises upon these facts:

Thomas T. Shreve died at Louisville, Kentucky, his domicile, November 5, 1869, leaving a last will, duly admitted to probate and record in that state. By that will, after providing for certain special devises, he directs his estate to be divided into five equal parts, of which he wills that one-fifth part be allotted to his son, Charles, U. Shreve, 'subject to such conditions and restrictions as hereinafter named.' The twelfth clause of the will is as follows:

'(12) As soon after my death as it can be conveniently done, I wish my executor hereinafter named, after first setting apart a fund sufficient to pay the above-named special devises, and incidental expenses, to make out a full and complete list and schedule of all my estate, of every character and description, real, personal, and mixed, in the state of Kentucky and elsewhere, and hand the same to the following-named persons, to-wit, James W. Henning, A. C. Badger, and A. Harris, who, or any two of whom, I desire to proceed to value it, and divide it into five equal shares upon the principles hereinbefore indicated. One-half of each share (which half I wish to be income-paying real estate) I desire to be set apart and conveyed to a trustee, to be held for the use and benefit of each child during his or her life, and then descend to his or her heirs, without any power or right on the part of said child to incumber said estate, or anticipate the rents thereof; but said trustee shall collect said rents, and, after paying taxes, insurance, and keeping the property in repair, pay the rent to the child in person quarterly, or as the same may be collected according to the terms of the lease; the other half of each share I wish conveyed to each child in fee, to do with as he or she may please.

'In placing these restrictions upon one-half of the estate I give my children, I do not wish it understood that I distrust their capacity to manage their own affairs, for I do not, but believe one-half of a share that each will receive will afford ample means to commence and conduct a respectable business, and as the other half will give them a comfortable living in the event they should be unfortunate in business or otherwise, and now having it in my power, it is my pleasure, as I believe it to be my duty, to shield and protect them against casualties and accidents as far as possible.'

The trustee for each child was to be appointed by the Louisville chancery court, and after the division of the estate had been made, and the report thereof by the commissioners re- corded, the executor of the will was directed to make deliveries, transfers, and conveyances according to the report and the directions of the will. In pursuance of these directions a division of the estate was made, and the share allotted to Charles U. Shreve, embracing the premises described in the bill, was conveyed by the executor by deed executed on June 25, 1870, to John M. Shreve, appointed to be trustee for Charles U. Shreve, to be held by him 'for the use and benefit of said Charles U. Shreve during his life, and then to descend to his heirs, without any power or authority of said Charles U. Shreve to incumber said estate or anticipate the rents-thereof; but said trustee shall collect said rents, and after paying taxes, insurance, and keeping the property in repair, pay the rent to the said Charles U. Shreve in person quarterly, or as the same may be collected, according to the leasing thereof, and with all other rights, duties, powers, and restrictions as are conferred and imposed by the will of said Thomas T. Shreve, deceased.' The trustee accepted the trust, and entered into possession of the property in execution of it.

On June 20, 1876, at Louisville, Charles U.Shreve conveyed to J.M.Shreve 'all the real, personal, and mixed property owned by said party of the first part, not exempt from execution, and which is as follows,' being certain specifically described lots and tracts of land, some in Cook county, Illinois, and some in Kentucky, and certain personal property, to have and to hold on certain trusts, viz., that the party of the second part shall 'immediately proceed, in such manner as to him shall seem best, either by public or private sale, or by instituting suit in the Louisville chancery court, to sell and have sold all the foregoing property, and any and all other property belonging to said first party not exempt from execution, which, by any oversight, may have been omitted in the foregoing list,' etc., for the payment of the debts of the grantor: First, all such as were specifically secured by liens on the property conveyed; second, all unsecured debts equally, and any surplus to return to the grantor; 'it being the object and intent of this conveyance to transfer to said second party all the property belonging to said first party not exempt from execution for t e benefit of all the creditors of said first party.' This deed did not describe any property held in trust for the grantor under his father's will, of which that named in the bill is a part; but the court of appeals of Kentucky, in Knefier v. Shreve, 78 Ky. 297, had before it the very question as to the construction of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
72 cases
  • In re Portner
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Colorado
    • 11 Noviembre 1989
    ...Ed.1989). The validity of a trust is governed by the applicable nonbankruptcy law of the trust's situs. Spindle v. Shreve, 111 U.S. 542, 547, 4 S.Ct. 522, 524, 28 L.Ed. 512, 513 (1883). Colorado, being the Trust's situs, provides our applicable nonbankruptcy Colorado spendthrift trusts are ......
  • Henderson v. Henderson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 24 Mayo 1923
    ... ... this country ( Nichols v. Eaton, 91 U.S. 716, 23 ... L.Ed. 254, 256, 257; Hyde v. Woods, 94 U.S. 523, 24 ... L.Ed. 264; Spindle v. Shreve, 111 U.S. 542, 4 S.Ct ... 522, 28 L.Ed. 512; Shelton v. King, 229 U.S. 90, 33 ... S.Ct. 686, 57 L.Ed. 1086; Garland v. Garland, 87 ... ...
  • McCann v. Randall
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 7 Mayo 1888
    ...where found, or where a trust in it is created or to be administered. Black v. Zacharie, 3 How. 514; May v. Breed, supra; Spindle v. Shreve, 111 U.S. 542, 4 S.Ct. 522. are administration assets where debtor resides. Debts of the United States are therefore administration assets, equally thr......
  • McCann v. Randall
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 7 Mayo 1888
    ...found, or where a trust in it is created or to be administered. Black v. Zacharie, 3 How. 514; May v. Breed, supra; Spindle v. Shreve, 111 U.S. 542, 4 Sup.Ct.Rep. 522. Debts are administration assets where debtor resides. Debts of the United States are therefore administration assets, equal......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT