Toothman et al. v. Barrett et al.
Decision Date | 30 November 1878 |
Parties | Toothman et al. v. Barrett et al. |
Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
S. B. died in 1858 and by his will provided: 1st. He gave to his, daughter E. an equitable estate in all his lands, 2d. He gave-to his son J. after the decease of bis daughter E., all his lands to him or his heirs subject to the payment of 461.00 of legacies, within rive years after her decease; and then adds also, in case that J. shall decease previous to the death of E.; or fail to discharge the before recited payments due or may become due on account of inability on the part of J., in either case the land to be sold by my executor, and the proceeds to be equally divided between W., C, H. & S., (who were the legatees to the amount of $400.00) and the child or children of J., when they may hecome to twenty-one years of age; and 3d. He gave $11.00 of additional legacies "to be paid by J., or in either case of his death or inability as before recited, by my executor;" and he appoints an executor, J. died in 1855 and E. in 1874. Before J's death he deeded his interest in the estate to 0., who it is claimed purchased the interest of the legatees, W., H. and S., paying to them the full amount of their legacies. Held:
By the first part of the third clause of this will J. took a contingent remainder in fee in the lands of the testator after the death of the life-tenant E., which by the last part of this third clause was liable to be divested by his failure to discharge, when due, the $461.00 of legacies; that the word "or" used in the first part of the third clause of this will, and the same word used in the latter part of the same clause, cannot either of them be construed to mean "and''; and that in the events which occurred, the children of J. are entitled to one-fifth of the proceeds of the land after the payment of the legacies, other than the $400.00 left-to W., C, 11. and S.
Appeal from and supersedeas to a decree of the circuit court of Wood county, rendered on the 13th day of October, 1877, in a cause in said court then pending, wherein Thornton F. Toothmanand others were plaintiffs, and Samuel Barrett and others were defendants, granted on the petition of Thornton F. Toothman, Sallie Toothman, Benjamin Walker Jr. and Matilda Walker.
Hon. James Monroe Jackson, judge of the fifth judicial circuit, rendered the decree appealed from.
Green, President, furnishes the following statement of the case.
Samuel Barrett died in 1838 leaving a will, of which the following is a copy:
I "I, Samuel Barrett, of Wood county, Virginia, do hereby make my last will and testament in manner and form following that is to say:
a4th. I also give and bequeath to each of the children of my son, John Barrett, deceased, $1.00 each; and also to the children of Patrick Caldwell $1,00 each; also to the children of my daughter, Anna Vaughan, deceased, each $1.00, to be paid unto each and all at or before the payment of the $50.00 to Ann Vaughan, to be paid by Jefferson Barrett, or, in either case of his death or inability, as before recited, by my executor; and lastly, I do constitute and appoint my friend, Isaac MePherson, executor of this, my last will and testament, hereby revoking all other or former wills or testaments by me heretofore made.
On October 6, 184J, Jefferson Barrett, named in this will, sold to his brother Caleb Barrett, "all his right, title, interest, claim and demand, that he had or might have, to the estate of Samuel Barrett, deceased, by his last will, thereby investing him Caleb Barrett with the ~ whole estate in the real estate devised to him, Jefferson Barrett, subject to same conditions, on which he held or might hold, and not otherwise, thereby ratifying and confirming this real estateunder the conditions and limitations named in said will to him Caleb Barrett his heirs and assigns forever.
In 1842 and 1846 Caleb Barrett also purchased from William Barrett and Samuel Barrett their interest in said estate for $100.00, and paid the same; audit is alleged in the answer of the children of Caleb Barrett, deceased, that he likewise bought in like manner the interest of Henry Lower for $100.00, and paid the same, but though the deed therefor is said to be fifed with this answer, it is not found among the papers of this cause.
Elizabeth Barrett died in 1874, Jefferson Barrett died in 1855 or 1856, leaving two daughters, Sallie, who married Thorton F. Toothman, and Matilda, who married Benjamin Walker, Jr.; and they having attained the age of twenty-one with their husbands in 1875 instituted a suit in chancery in the circuit court of Wood county, against William Barrett, Samuel Barrett, Mary Lower, widow of Henry Lower, and his unknown heirs, the children of Caleb Barrett, deceased, and numerous other parties interested in the estate of Samuel Barrett under said will.
The bill and amended bill set out the facts above stated except the purchases made by Caleb Barrett of William Barrett, Samuel Barrett and Henry Lower^ which are stated in the answer of the children of Caleb Barrett, who filed with their answer the evidence of the purchase, and payment therefor, of the interest of William and Samuel Barrett, but not that of Henry Lower.
The bills claim, that under the will of Samuel Barrett, as Jefferson Barrett died before Elizabeth Barrett, the real estate, devised to her for life by Samuel Barrett's will by the third clause thereof, was to be divided into five equal parts, one part going to the assignors or heirs of William Barrett, of Caleb Barrett, of Henry Lower and of Samuel the plaintiffs, as children of Jefferson Barrett.
The answer of the children of Caleb Barrett claims, that on the death of Elizabeth Barrett they became entitled to all the real estate left to her for life by reason of the purchase of Caleb Barrett, their father, of Jefferson Barrett and the payment by Caleb Barrett of the $100.00 to William Barrett, Henry Lower and Samuel Barrett respectively before the death of Elizabeth Barrett, these being the sums provided to be paid them by the third clause of this will. They admit, that the sums due Ann Vaughan and the various parties named in the fourth clause of the will have not been paid, the same not being yet due.
The bills were demurred to by some of the parties defendant; and they were regularly taken for confessed as to all the other defendants. And on October 13, 1877, the court rendered the following decree:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lancaster County Bank v. Marshel
...in the language of the will above quoted, may not properly be construed as "and." Miller v. Philip, 5 Paige Ch. (N.Y.) 573; Toothman v. Barrett, 14 W.Va. 301; Austin Oakes, 48 Hun 492, 1 N.Y.S. 307. So, too, "use" and "ownership" are not synonymous. State v. Stockwell, 23 N.D. 70, 134 N.W. ......
-
Schaeffer's Adm'r v. Schaeffer's Adm'r
...under his will. 1 Underbill on Wills, § 353. Having given authorities from abroad—and many more could be given—I now refer to Tooth-man v. Barrett, 14 W. Va. 301, as decisive. A will gave a daughter a life estate in land, and gave all his land after her death to "J. B. or his heirs, " and i......
-
Schaeffer's Adm'r v. Schaeffer's Adm'r
...under his will. 1 Underhill on Wills, § 353. Having given authorities from abroad--and many more could be given--I now refer to Toothman v. Barrett, 14 W.Va. 301, as decisive. will gave a daughter a life estate in land, and gave all his land after her death to "J. B. or his heirs," and in c......
-
Page v. Rouss
... ... event is a contingent remainder. Woodward v ... Woodward, 28 W.Va. 200; Hinton v. Milburn's ... Ex'rs, 23 W.Va. 166; Toothman v. Barrett, ... 14 W.Va. 301. And, in the event of such survival, the ... remainder could not vest in him until the widow either died ... or ... ...