Hartman's Estate

Philadelphia County Orphans' Court

Hartman's Estate

22 Pa. D. & C. 295, 1934 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 358

CourtPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County

DecidedDecember 22, 1934

Docketno. 581

StatusPublished

This text of 22 Pa. D. & C. 295 (Hartman's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hartman's Estate, 22 Pa. D. & C. 295, 1934 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 358 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Lamorelle, P. J.,

To interpret the will other than as does the learned auditing judge would result in an intestacy as to income, when and if the youngest of the grandchildren reached the age of 21 years, and such interpretation is always, where possible, to be avoided.

The accounting is had because one of the grandchildren has attained majority, and the exceptions go to the ruling of the learned auditing judge that this child now receives a share of accumulated income and continues to receive a pro rata share of all income, at least for the term of his life.

The purpose of the will is apparent; it was the desire of testatrix to benefit these grandchildren, and them only, for she excluded their mother from any participation whatever, and the income was not to be liable for the debts of any of the beneficiaries, without the power of alienation, and not subject to anticipation of any kind whatsoever. By necessary implication, therefore, income was payable to all the grandchildren during the duration of the trust, but none was to be paid them in minority, which latter income was to accumulate for their benefit, and distribution was conditioned on reaching majority.

All exceptions are dismissed, and the adjudication is confirmed absolutely.

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

Lamorelle, P. J.,

To interpret the will other than as does the learned auditing judge would result in an intestacy as to income, when and if the youngest of the grandchildren reached the age of 21 years, and such interpretation is always, where possible, to be avoided.

The accounting is had because one of the grandchildren has attained majority, and the exceptions go to the ruling of the learned auditing judge that this child now receives a share of accumulated income and continues to receive a pro rata share of all income, at least for the term of his life.

The purpose of the will is apparent; it was the desire of testatrix to benefit these grandchildren, and them only, for she excluded their mother from any participation whatever, and the income was not to be liable for the debts of any of the beneficiaries, without the power of alienation, and not subject to anticipation of any kind whatsoever. By necessary implication, therefore, income was payable to all the grandchildren during the duration of the trust, but none was to be paid them in minority, which latter income was to accumulate for their benefit, and distribution was conditioned on reaching majority.

All exceptions are dismissed, and the adjudication is confirmed absolutely.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 Pa. D. & C. 295, 1934 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartmans-estate-paorphctphilad-1934.