Bisler Estate

63 Pa. D. & C.2d 336, 1973 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 329
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
DecidedApril 25, 1973
Docketno. 3629
StatusPublished

This text of 63 Pa. D. & C.2d 336 (Bisler Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bisler Estate, 63 Pa. D. & C.2d 336, 1973 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 329 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1973).

Opinion

C. KLEIN, A. J.,

The reason for filing the present account is the death on July 19,1972, of Virginia B. Orr, life income beneficiary, whereupon under the terms of testator’s will the share of principal from which she was receiving the income became distributable to her issue. The other two income beneficiaries, Miriam B. Jameson and Esther B. Corson, are still living and their shares will remain in trust for them. . . .

[337]*337At the audit a question was presented as to the allocation of accounting expenses totaling $7,050.75, consisting of counsel fee of $6,500 and costs of filing the account of $550.75. Mr. Sheer, representing the parties who will receive the outgoing share, requested these expenses to be allocated one-half to that share and one-half to the share remaining in trust. Mr. Mann, who represents Miriam B. Jameson, one of the two continuing life beneficiaries, and two of her daughters, asks that these expenses be charged in their entirety against the outgoing share.

The accountant has taken credit in principal disbursements for payment of $8,500 counsel fee, subsequently reduced to $6,500, by agreement, and $550.75 costs of filing the account.

In Cook Trust, 20 Fiduc. Rep. 95, 48 D. & C. 2d 543 (1970), the facts were quite similar to those in the present case. There, Judge Shoyer of this court quoted with approval from Griffith’s Estate, 26 D. & C. 75, 86, the general rule that:

“. . . whoever has benefited by the trust’s administration and the accounting should pay for it, and if both benefit the expense should be shared in equal or unequal amounts to be determined from the facts.”

The auditing judge has carefully reviewed the record in this case and is in agreement with the position taken by counsel for the remaindermen that the expenses in question should be allocated equally between the outgoing share and the two shares remaining in trust. The present account covers a period of 1214 years and one-third of the principal will be distributed. There is no question that all shares will benefit from the accounting and from this adjudication. . . .

The account shows a balance of principal, personalty and converted realty, of $1,226,404.16 [338]*338to which add administration costs credited in the account _9.050.75 making a total of $1,235,454.91 from which one-third less administration costs of $3,525.38 (one-half of $7,050.75), is awarded one-half to Virginia Orr Maes and one-sixth to each of G. A. Bisler Orr, Jr., Virginia B. Orr, 2nd and Vivian Orr McCabe; and the remaining two-thirds, less administration costs of $3,525.37, is awarded to The Fidelity Bank, Trustee, in trust for the continued uses and purposes declared in the will. . . .

And now, April 25, 1973, the account is confirmed nisi.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 Pa. D. & C.2d 336, 1973 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bisler-estate-pactcomplphilad-1973.