Myers v. Cady

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Myers v. Cady

48 A. 797, 22 R.I. 549, 1901 R.I. LEXIS 46

DecidedMarch 29, 1901

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A. 797 (Myers v. Cady) 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

Myers v. Cady, 48 A. 797, 22 R.I. 549, 1901 R.I. LEXIS 46 (R.I. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The will of Agnes McWilliams said: “I desire that my home estate on Narragansett boulevard in Edgewood, town of Cranston, State of Rhode Island, be sold within a year after my decease, provided a suitable price can be obtained for the same.” It then provided that the money derived therefrom should be added to what she had, and that the whole should be paid to designated legatees.

(1) The question raised is whether the estate can be sold after the expiration of the year. It is perfectly clear from the will that the estate was to be sold. The will contained no residuary clause, except by providing that each of the legatees should be entitled to receive a proportional part of the surplus. The expression of desire was equivalent to a direction to sell. The limitation of time was dependent upon obtaining a suitable price. It evidently meant that while she desired a speedy sale she did not want the estate sacrificed by a sale before a suitable price could be obtained. We think, therefore, that the executor has authority to sell and is entitled to a decree for specific performance.

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

Per Curiam.

The will of Agnes McWilliams said: “I desire that my home estate on Narragansett boulevard in Edgewood, town of Cranston, State of Rhode Island, be sold within a year after my decease, provided a suitable price can be obtained for the same.” It then provided that the money derived therefrom should be added to what she had, and that the whole should be paid to designated legatees.

(1) The question raised is whether the estate can be sold after the expiration of the year. It is perfectly clear from the will that the estate was to be sold. The will contained no residuary clause, except by providing that each of the legatees should be entitled to receive a proportional part of the surplus. The expression of desire was equivalent to a direction to sell. The limitation of time was dependent upon obtaining a suitable price. It evidently meant that while she desired a speedy sale she did not want the estate sacrificed by a sale before a suitable price could be obtained. We think, therefore, that the executor has authority to sell and is entitled to a decree for specific performance.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A. 797, 22 R.I. 549, 1901 R.I. LEXIS 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/myers-v-cady-ri-1901.