Verrill v. Weymouth
Decision Date | 21 June 1878 |
Citation | 68 Me. 318 |
Parties | Byron D. VERRILL, administrator de bonis non, with the will annexed, of Isabella W. Bishop, in equity, v. L. Eugene WEYMOUTH, administrator, et als. |
Court | Maine Supreme Court |
BILL IN EQUITY, asking the construction of a will.
A testatrix gave her mother two dollars per week for life, made her son D. residuary legatee, and added: " Should D. die without an issue, all my property is to be equally divided between my mother, brothers, and sister." D. died leaving a wife and only son, who also died before any distribution of the estate. Held, that the personal property in the hands of the administrator vested in D. on the death of the testatrix, charged with the annuity to her mother.
B. D Verrill, pro se, as administrator de bonis non.
F. M Ray, for L. E. Weymouth, administrator, and Fannie C. Bishop.
J. H Drummond & J. O. Winship, for the heirs at law.
This is a bill in equity brought to determine the construction of the will of Isabella W. Bishop. The clauses of the will which are involved, are as follows:
The codicil thereto contains the following provisions:
The testatrix died in March, 1872, leaving her son, De Clare Bishop, her only heir at law. He died August 2, 1876, after arriving at the age of twenty-one, but before arriving at the age of twenty-five years, leaving a widow, Fannie C. Bishop, and one son, Harry Bell Bishop. He died October 16, 1876, leaving his mother, Fannie C. Bishop, his only heir. At the death of De Clare Bishop his son, Harry Bell, was the only heir at law of the testatrix.
At the time of the death of the testatrix, and at the time of the execution of her will, she owned fourteen shares in the First National Bank of Portland, which passed into the hands of the trustee named in the will.
Three questions are propounded to the court: 1. " As to the disposition of the trust fund in the hands of said trustee to wit, said bank shares." 2. " As to the disposition of the residue in the hand of your orator as administrator de bonis non, with the will annexed, after the decease of the said Sarah Johnson." 3. " The disposition by said will of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Carter v. Carter
...maintenance meanwhile, is vested. Ordway v. Dow, 55 N. H. 11. Other cases to the like effect are Tucker v. Bishop, 16 N. Y. 402; Verrill v. Weymouth, 68 Me. 318; Lowe v. Barnett, 38 Miss. 329;Paterson v. Ellis, 11 Wend. (N. Y.) 259;Provenchere's Appeal, 67 Pa. 463; Van Wyck v. Bloodgood, 1 ......
-
Davis v. McKown
...several devises, or, more properly, bequests, under item fifth, were present absolute bequests, to be possessed in the future. Verrill v. Weymouth, 68 Me. 318; Buck v. Paine, 75 Me. 582; Paine v. Forsaith, 84 Me. 66, 24 A. A question arises under item eighth, in connection with the settleme......
-
Buck v. Paine
... ... The power lodged with the trustees ... demonstrates the correctness of this view. Rop. Leg. *553; ... Leighton v. Leighton, 58 Me. 63; Verrill v ... Weymouth, 68 Me. 318 ... The ... complainant further contends that his wife having an ... equitable vested fee, she could ... ...
-
Scott v. West
...Tucker v. Bishop, 16 N. Y. 402;Teed v. Morton, supra; Annable v. Patch, supra. See, also, Hawkins and Williams, as cited above; Verrill v. Weymouth, 68 Me. 318;Brown v. Brown, 44 N. H. 281;Teele v. Hathaway, 129 Mass. 164;Dale v. White, 33 Conn. 294;Newberry v. Hinman, 49 Conn. 130. Thus, i......