In re Estate of Shade

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In re Estate of Shade

45 A. 649, 194 Pa. 599, 1900 Pa. LEXIS 448

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedFebruary 12, 1900

DocketAppeal, No. 139

StatusPublished

This text of 45 A. 649 (In re Estate of Shade) 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

In re Estate of Shade, 45 A. 649, 194 Pa. 599, 1900 Pa. LEXIS 448 (Pa. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

We are clearly of opinion that the legacy to Emma E. Graber was not an absolute gift. It is coupled immediately in the will with a direction to the executors to act in the same capacity as in the bequest to Martha Graber, which was to invest the amount of the legacy at interest and to pay the interest to the legatee during her life, and the principal to other persons after [605]*605her death. In the legacy to Emma the principal is to be paid after her death to her children and their heirs and assigns absolutely, and if Emma left no issue, then to other persons named. The reasons for this conclusion are so well expressed in the report of the auditor in which the learned court below concurred that we affirm the decree on the opinion of the auditor.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

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

Per Curiam,

We are clearly of opinion that the legacy to Emma E. Graber was not an absolute gift. It is coupled immediately in the will with a direction to the executors to act in the same capacity as in the bequest to Martha Graber, which was to invest the amount of the legacy at interest and to pay the interest to the legatee during her life, and the principal to other persons after [605]*605her death. In the legacy to Emma the principal is to be paid after her death to her children and their heirs and assigns absolutely, and if Emma left no issue, then to other persons named. The reasons for this conclusion are so well expressed in the report of the auditor in which the learned court below concurred that we affirm the decree on the opinion of the auditor.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 A. 649, 194 Pa. 599, 1900 Pa. LEXIS 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-shade-pa-1900.