McMasters v. Shellito

Citations

• 14 Pa. Super. 303
• 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 52

Syllabus

<p>Will — Construction—General and particular intent — Controlling intent.</p> <p>Where there is a manifest general intent, the construction should be such as to effectuate it, though by that construction some particular intent may be defeated. The intention of a testator is .to be so construed as to be rendered consistent with the rules of law, but, where it is plain, it will be allowed to control the legal operation of the words, however technical.</p> <p>Devise to a class — Overstatement of number.</p> <p>Where the testator overstates t-he number of the objects of his bounty, who are entitled to take as a class under a particular devise, the whole estate will pass to the smaller number who fall within the class.</p> <p>Will — Devise to son for life — Alternative limitations to sons and daughters of life tenant.</p> <p>Testator made the following devise: “The place that William lives upon, he can live upon as long as he chooses, and when he dies or leaves it, it is to descend to his two eldest sons and for want of heirs male it is to descend to his two eldest daughters.” Held, (1) that William took a terminal life estate: (2) that the words “ in default of male heirs ” have the meaning “ and in default of sons ” and that the ultimate devise becomes the gift of a fee after a fee and that the last disposition can take effect only as an executory devise or an alternative limitation, not as a remainder; (3) that William the life tenant died leaving two daughters and the children of an only son, to whom the estate passes under the terms of the devise.</p>