Musselman's Estate

5 Watts 9
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 15, 1836
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 5 Watts 9 (Musselman's Estate) 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
Musselman's Estate, 5 Watts 9 (Pa. 1836).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The ruling purpose of the testator was to produce equality of distribution. He declares that " each child or grandchildren (the children of a deceased child) shall receive as much as shall make it, or them, equal to that one of the seven which has received most.” Particular expressions that would stand in the way of this, are to be construed in subordination to it, or disregarded. The words, “ so much as at my death shall stand charged,” were not intended to give effect to an unfounded charge that would defeat his proclaimed intent. "He was providing for actual circumstances not merely as they then stood, but as they might stand after-wards. His will was not made in expectation of immediate death; he lived five years beyond its date; and the final state of the entries might be expected to be determined, like the final accomplishment of all other testamentary purposes, by accident. , He might, doubtless, have peremptorily directed thq. book, in whatever condition found at his death, to be taken for conclusive proof of the state of the accounts ; but he has not done so, and we are not to intend that he meant to leave the adjustment of the shares of his offspring to the arbitrament of chance.

Decree affirmed.

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

Related

Fichthorn v. Fichthorn
45 Pa. Super. 52 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1910)
Tompkins v. Lear
124 S.W. 592 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Harris v. Harris's Estate
72 A. 912 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1909)
In re the appeal of Moore
47 A. 731 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1900)
Jaques v. Swasey
27 N.E. 771 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1891)
Whitman v. Hapgood
10 Mass. 437 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1813)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Watts 9, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/musselmans-estate-pa-1836.