Miller's Estate

Citations

• 26 Pa. Super. 443

Syllabus

<p>Will — Latent ambiguity — Parol evidence — Evidence.</p> <p>Parol evidence is admissible to explain a latent ambiguityin a will, or to apply its provisions to the subject or person intended when the description is defective, uncertain or too general to be understood.</p> <p>Where the meaning of a devise is uncertain the law will adhere as closely as possible to the general rules of inheritance, and whosoever claims against the law of descent must show a satisfactory written title.</p> <p>Parol testimony is admissible to show whom the testator meant by the words contained in his will “ William Wilson’s children,” where it appears that he had no relatives answering such description, and the will itself is silent as to the identity of the William Wilson therein named. In such a case it may be shown that testator had a sister married to one Seth Wilson, who had a brother named William Wilson, that testator frequently confused William with Seth, and that testator stated to the scrivener who wrote his will that he meant by William Wilson’s children, the children of his sister. The court in such a case will award the fund to Seth Wilson’s children, but will not limit the class merely to Seth Wilson’s children by his first wife, testator’s sister.</p>