Goldtree v. Thompson
Citations
- 79 Cal. 613
- 22 P. 50
- 1889 Cal. LEXIS 786
Syllabus
<p>Will—Trust — Construction—Devise-of Income—Residuary Estate. Where a will devises the testator’s estate in trust to be invested, and to pay the income to certain persons named in certain proportions during their lives, and to their surviving husbands or widows until remarriage, and after that event, the same proportions in trust in equal shares for their children by the first marriage who shall attain the age of twenty-one years or marry, and during the minority of any legatee, to apply the income of their respective shares toward his or her support or advancement in the world, the life devisees take only the income, and no part of the corpus of the residuary estate, but the corpus of the trust property will pass to the children, to be paid over to them in the proportions specified when they arrive at majority or marry, there being no provision for a continuance of the trust thereafter.</p> <p>Id.—Perpetuity — Suspension of Power of Alienation — Accumulations— Interest of After-born Child.—Such will does not create a perpetuity, or unlawfully suspend the power of alienation, since all the persons beneficially interested in the will were living at the death of the testator (save one child, who died a minor and unmarried), and the accumulations were lawful, being only for the benefit of minors, to end with . their minority or marriage. Accumulations of income on an invested fund are not forbidden because they tend to a perpetuity. A child born after the death of the testator, who is specified as one of the legatees, having come into existence during the life of its father, one of the lives in being at the creation of the interest, would take an interest under the will vested in right when born, and in possession contingent on attaining majority or marriage, within twenty-one years after its father’s death, which event would not render the interest devised void.</p> <p>Id. — Validity of Trust. — A devise of the residue of the personal estate of a testator to certain
Judges: Thornton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In re Estate of WalkerlyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-09-03· cited 115×
- Goad v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court· 1898-01-07· cited 82×
- Goldtree v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1890-03-10· cited 21×
- Caffroy v. FremlinCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1961-12-19· cited 15×
- Bank of Am. v. HodgeCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1967-09-28· cited 8×
- Estate of PageCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1967-09-28· cited 7×
- Den v. LutonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1935-05-22· cited 4×
- In re Estate of ClancyCalifornia Superior Court, San Francisco County· 1894-05-23
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.