Thompson v. Kaufman

Citations

• 9 Pa. Super. 305
• 1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 27

Syllabus

<p>Extrinsic evidence to explain will — Latent ambiguities.</p> <p>Parol evidence is admissible only to explain latent ambiguities in 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>When the direct purpose of the testator can be fulfilled from the terms of the will and the subject of the devise existed at the time the will was executed and when it went into effect, no parol evidence is permissible, except the subject be doubtful, and then only to resolve the doubt or to remove a difficulty arising from a defective or mistaken description and thereby give effect to the will.</p> <p>Evidence — Parol evidence to identify subject of a devise.</p> <p>Parol evidence is, as a rule, admissible to identify the subject-matter of a devise, but as soon as the process of identification shows the existence of a subject which fully satisfies the terms of a devise, the object of that process, which is simply to apply a direction that would otherwise remain inoperative, is accomplished, no uncertainty is left to be cleared away, and it is not competent to show by further parol testimony that something else was in fact intended.</p>