Wood's Estate
Citations
- 267 Pa. 462
- 110 A. 90
- 1920 Pa. LEXIS 890
Syllabus
<p>Wills — Legacies—Intention—Parol evidence — Circumstances of testator's acts — Specific legades — Corporate stoch in different companies — Bight of selection.</p> <p>1. Testator’s intention must be derived from the will free from artificial or technical construction, if it is at all possible to reach such intention without it; in arriving at the intention, the circumstances surrounding testator’s acts, his condition, and the amount and character of his property, must be taken into consideration.</p> <p>2. A legacy is specific when there is property in kind to fill it, the bequest of a particular thing, specified and distinguished from all others of the same kind, which would immediately vest; where it is specific, it can be satisfied by delivering only the particular thing.</p> <p>3. Where a testator owns stock in two or more companies and bequeaths a certain number of shares in either or both companies, the legatee has the right to select from either or both the stock he prefers, so long as there is equality among legatees.</p> <p>4. A testator before his death agreed to a consolidation between two companies in which he was interested. Before the agreement was performed and shortly before his death he executed his will wherein he directed his interests not to be sold during the life of his wife; after his death he gave to four persons shares in blocks of 1,000 each, and in another paragraph directed that 2,000 shares, not otherwise disposed of, be sold. There was not sufficient stock in either company prior to consolidation to answer the several bequests, but there was an ample number of shares in the consolidated company to so answer. Held, (a) that the legatees took stock of the consolidation, or the originals converted, as specific legacies; (b) parol evidence was admissible to identify the subject of the gift.</p> <p>5. In such case, when testator died, his personal representatives found the shares of stock of the two mentioned companies impressed with an ob
Judges: Brown, Kephart, Moschzisker, Nephart, Simpson, Walling
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- McFerren EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1950-11-13· cited 51×
- In Re Estate of FoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-07-10· cited 36×
- Soles EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1973-05-04· cited 27×
- Estate of TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1978-10-05· cited 21×
- Brooklyn Trust Co. v. WarringtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1923-04-09· cited 20×
- Martin's EstatePhiladelphia County Orphans' Court· 1947-06-27
- Yeker EstateLehigh County Orphans' Court· 1952-06-30
- Yingling EstateLehigh County Orphans' Court· 1957-12-05
- Neal EstateWarren County Orphans' Court· 1963-10-15
- Rice EstateChester County Court of Common Pleas· 1972-06-27
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.