D'Wolf v. D'Wolf

4 R.I. 450
CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island
DecidedMarch 6, 1857
StatusPublished

This text of 4 R.I. 450 (D'Wolf v. D'Wolf) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
D'Wolf v. D'Wolf, 4 R.I. 450 (R.I. 1857).

Opinion

Brayton, J. 1

This bill alleges, that James D’Wolf, late of Bristol, in and by his last will and testament devised the residue •and remainder of his estate, real and personal, to his executors, in trust for his, the said testator’s children, namely, James D’Wolf, the children of his late daughter, Mary Ann Sumner, Mark Anthony D’Wolf, William Henry D’Wolf, Harriet Hall, Catharine D’Wolf Dodge, Nancy B. Homer, William Bradford D’Wolf, and Josephine M. D’Wolf Lovet, and his grandson James D’Wolf, the .sole plaintiff to this bill, for the term of twenty years, the rents, income, profits, or dividends, to be paid them annually; and at the end of said term, the said estates to be divided between them, in the manner provided in said will; and that the said William Bradford D’Wolf is sole surviving executor of said will, and sole trustee of said' estates ; and on or about the 12th day of July, 1852, took possession of said estates, and took upon himself the perfornaance of the said trust, and has since received a large amount of estate and property, real and personal, under said trust; that the respondent, though he has now been executor for three and a half years, has not rendered any account, as such executor, to the court of probate of the town of Bristol, or to any other person interested, to the knowledge of the plaintiff, and that knowledge and information as to the condition of said estate has been withheld from the plaintiff and others interested, by the respondent, contrary to his duty and contrary to law; that the plaintiff is largely interested in all said residuary estate and property, and in the performance of the trusts in said will declared, in respect of the same, and is entitled to have said trusts fully and fairly performed and executed in his behalf; and in order to this, is entitled to know and be fully informed by the respondent, as such trustee of said residuary, as to all the property and estate of every kind, which he, as trustee, has received as part of said residuary estate, and what has been done with every part thereof, how managed, how disposed, and its history and condition ever since it has been in *452 his hands or control; what has been received from all the same, and how received, and what appropriation 'and use- has been made of all the same, and what said residuary estate and property now consists of, fully and particularly, and minutely, in every respect; that the complainant has repeatedly asked of the respondent, orally, and in writing, information and an account of said residuary property so received by him, and of what has been done with the same, how managed, of what it now consists, and information as to the rents, profits, and dividends thereof; but the respondent has neglected and refused to furnish to him any definite, or written statement, inventory, or account of the same, or any distinct or available information as to the same; that the plaintiff has received, from time to time, of the respondent, sums- of money, as and for his share of the rents, incomes, and profits of said residuary to be paid over annually, and has given receipts for the same; but what the gross income, profits, and dividends, of said whole residuary estate has been during any given year, or at any time, the plaintiff is ignorant, and has never been informed by the respondent ; nor whether all the incomes, profits, and dividends, have been paid out annually, or part only, and the residue invested!

The bill then sets forth the pretences upon which the respondent has refused to render any account; as that, inasmuch as the principal of said residuary estate is not to be paid out until the end of twenty years, that the persons interested therein are not entitled to any account, discovery, or information, or knowledge in relation to said fund, or as to the management, improvement, or administration of the same, and are not entitled to any discovery, information, or account, until the termination of said trust; whereas the bill charges, that he is now and long has been entitled to a discovery in relation to all said property from said respondent, and also to an account from him of all the receipts, dividends, rents, profits, and income, of all said estate and fund, and also of the appropriation and use of all the same.

The bill then prays a discovery as to the acceptance of the trust by the respondent, and whether he has not held and man *453 aged the estates as trustee; whether the plaintiff is not interested in the said residuary estate, and also that the respondent may set forth and discover, clearly and distinctly, all the real estate which has at any time come to his possession or knowledge as part of said estate, the location, situation, and condition of each parcel, its estimated value, whether leased or not, and for how much, and to whom; whether any has been sold, when, to whom, whether for cash or on credit, at public or private sale; and whether the trustee has purchased with said fund any real estate, and when, of whom, for how much, where situated; that he discover and set forth the personal estate he has received, and the income, dividends, or profits thereof, as part of said residue, and what it consists of particularly; and also, that he set forth and discover and render to the plaintiff, a full, true, and perfect account of all moneys and property at any time received by him, as and for the rents, incomes, profits, and dividends of all said real and personal estates, so in his possession, as part of said residuary estate and fund; and also, that he may answer and set forth the expenses of said fund, and the management of the same for each year, by itself, — stating to whom any sum of money has been paid, when, and what for, what claims there are now existing against said residuary fund, to whom, and for what, with the vouchers for all said expenditures since the estate came to his possession; and that an account be taken of said real and personal estate, constituting said residuary estate and fund, and that the income and profits thereof be ascertained, and that the same be applied to the due performance of said trusts, and that the said residuary estate and fund may be ascertained, and the rights of the plaintiff thereto defined and secured, both as to income and dividends and the principal, and that for these purposes all proper directions be given, and that your orator may have such further relief in the premises, as the nature of the case may require.

To this bill the defendant has demurred for want of parties; for that it appears by the complainant’s bill, that all the children of James D’Wolf, the testator, named in said bill, namely, James D’Wolf, the children of the testator’s daughter, Mary Ann Sumner, Mark Anthony D’Wolf, William Henry D’Wolf, Harriet *454 Hall, and Jonathan Prescot Hall, her husband, Catharine D’Wolf Dodge, Nancy B. Homer, and Josephine M. D’Wolf Lovet, their heirs and assigns, executors, or administrators, are interested in the said rest, residue, and remainder of said estate, both real and personal, and in the account thereof, sought by the complainant in and by said bill, and are therefore necessary parties to said bill, but that the complainant has not made them parties to the bill.

The rule in equity requires that all parties interested in the object of the suit should be made parties to the bill. This rule applies to all cases in which an account is sought.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 R.I. 450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dwolf-v-dwolf-ri-1857.