Skip to main content
· 5/12/1913

Laning's Estate

Citations

  • 241 Pa. 98
  • 88 A. 289
  • 1913 Pa. LEXIS 740

Syllabus

<p>’ Wills — Construction—'Advancements—Evidence—0. C.— Findings of fact.</p> <p>1. Testator by will provided: “I desire that four thousand dollars of the money advanced by me for my son Augustus shall not be deducted from his share of my estate.” It appeared that the testator had made certain payments directly to hi§ son Augustus in his lifetime, and that he had made certain other payments to third persons for his son. Held, the language of the will above quoted should not he construed to mean that payments made directly to the son, as distinguished from others made to third persons for his benefit, were intended by the testator to be excluded in computing advancements chargeable against the son’s share of the estate.</p> <p>2. In such case it appeared that testator had paid certain sums to his son prior to his marriage, while the son was living with him in his household, and had paid him certain other sums after his marriage, and while he was engaged in business for himself. It was held to be a fair presumption that payments of the first class were intended as gifts, and of the second class as advancements.</p> <p>3. In such case, it was error for the Orphans’ Court to charge the son with an advancement, where the evidence showed the payment was a loan to a firm, and there was nothing to show that the testator intended it to be charged as an advancement against his son. It was also error to charge the son with the value of a lot conveyed to him, and with the amount of a check paid to him prior to-his marriage, where the circumstances' indicated that both were intended as gifts, and there was no evidence that testator intended either of them to be charged against the son as advancements.</p> <p>4. In such case, the check stubs of the testator’s check hook, upon which he- had made memoranda of dates, amounts and purposes for which the checks were issued, were properly introduced in evidence, for the purpose of showing the intention with which the payments were made.

Judges: Brown, Elkin, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.