McNeal v. Pierce

Citations

• 73 Ohio St. (N.S.) 7

Syllabus

<p>Legacy of sum for care of son — Does not imply debt, when— Pleaded in action, barred by limitation, when — Effect of death of legatee before testator — Interpretation of wills — Statute of limitations.</p> <p>1. A legacy reciting that it is “in consideration of her care for my invalid mother many years preceding her death, and also her care of my infant son” does not imply a debt but a bounty. It is not an acknowledgment of a legal obligation and when pleaded in an action, barred by the statute of limitations, to recover for such services, does not remove the bar of the statute.</p> <p>2. A legacy given in payment of a debt, by the express terms of the will, does not lapse by the death of the legatee before the testator, but when by the terms of the will it appears that the intention of the testator was to confer a bounty it is not competent to show a different intent and to prevent a lapse by proof that the -legacy was given in payment of a debt. ,</p>