Appeal of Jackson

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Appeal of Jackson

17 A. 535, 126 Pa. 105, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 842

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 29, 1889

DocketNo. 102

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 17 A. 535 (Appeal of Jackson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Appeal of Jackson, 17 A. 535, 126 Pa. 105, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 842 (Pa. 1889).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We think the Orphans’Court was clearly right in holding wxv^v, was not entitled to one half of the residue of the personal property undisposed of by the testator. The widow having died a few days after the testator, and having made no election, we must presume she takes under the will. The will gave her the full one third of all the estate of the testator, during her life. There was no intestacy of any portion of the estate, as to her. She gets the one third of it all, in-[109]*109eluding that portion of whicli the testator died intestate. Taking her one third of the undisposed of surplus under the will, site cannot claim the one half of it against the will. In this respect the case differs from Carman’s App., 2 Fenny. 332, where the widow took specifically only certain portions of the estate, and the will itself gave her no part of the residue. So also in Reed’s Est., 82 Pa. 428, the widow “ was put to no election between her legacy under the will and this undisposed of estate.” Here, the widow was put to her election as to the whole estate, as well that which passed by the will, as the portion as to which her husband died intestate.

The decree is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at the costs 'of the appellant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

We think the Orphans’Court was clearly right in holding wxv^v, was not entitled to one half of the residue of the personal property undisposed of by the testator. The widow having died a few days after the testator, and having made no election, we must presume she takes under the will. The will gave her the full one third of all the estate of the testator, during her life. There was no intestacy of any portion of the estate, as to her. She gets the one third of it all, in-[109]*109eluding that portion of whicli the testator died intestate. Taking her one third of the undisposed of surplus under the will, site cannot claim the one half of it against the will. In this respect the case differs from Carman’s App., 2 Fenny. 332, where the widow took specifically only certain portions of the estate, and the will itself gave her no part of the residue. So also in Reed’s Est., 82 Pa. 428, the widow “ was put to no election between her legacy under the will and this undisposed of estate.” Here, the widow was put to her election as to the whole estate, as well that which passed by the will, as the portion as to which her husband died intestate.

The decree is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at the costs 'of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A. 535, 126 Pa. 105, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 842, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/appeal-of-jackson-pa-1889.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack