Scott's Estate
Citations
- 37 Pa. Super. 198
Syllabus
<p>Will — Conversion—Presumption—Blending of real and personal estate.</p> <p>The presumption is against conversion by will, which is a legal fiction introduced on equitable principles to effectuate the intention of the testator. It is only to be resorted to when actually necessary to carry out the testamentary purpose. A direction to convert must be positive and the instrument resorted to must decisively fix on the ■land the quality of money. The direction to sell must be imperative ■and explicit. If it be contingent on the election or consent of the legatee ■or devisee or other person than the executor, such power of sale does not work a conversion, even where the will provides for a payment of legacies and distribution of the remainder of the fund. And this is so although the contingency on which the sale depends may never arise.</p> <p>■ Testator directed “that at any time after the decease of my wife, my said executors may be required by a majority of those having an interest therein to dispose of all that portion of my real estate on which I now reside, together with all the personal estate then having properly belonged to my said wife, and divide the proceeds of such sale in manner and proportion as follows:” He further directed that if his wife died prior to his youngest son arriving “at the age of twenty-one years, sái’d sale and distribution shall not take place until that period shall have arrived.” Held, that the direction to sell did not operate to produce a conversion at- the death of the testator, and no conversion •occurred until the real estate was sold by the direction of a majority of the surviving children.</p>
Judges: Beaver, Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Fahnestock v. FahnestockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1892-11-11· cited 17×
- Jones v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1881-01-06· cited 11×
- Anewalt's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1862-04-21· cited 10×
- Neely v. GranthamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1868-07-02· cited 10×
- Sauerbier's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1902-03-24· cited 10×
- Boshart v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1840-05-02· cited 8×
- Stoner v. ZimmermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1853-07-25· cited 7×
- Bleight v. Manufacturers' & Mechanics' BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1848-03-26· cited 5×
- Nagle's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1850-03-15· cited 5×
- Henry v. M'CloskeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1839-09-15· cited 5×
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.