Wells Wife v. Fairbanks

6 R.I. 474
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided September 6, 1860·Published

Opinion

Brayton, J.

This action- was brought under section 2, of chap. 204, of the Revised Statutes, which provides, that “ if any joint tenant, tenant in common, or coparcener, shall commit any waste on any estate by him holden in joint tenancy, tenancy in common, or coparcenary, without the consent of the other joint tenants,-tenants in common, or coparceners, he shall forfeit double the amount of the waste so done, to be recovered by the other joint tenants, tenants in common, or coparceners, to their own use.”

The question made by the motion for a new trial is, whether the plaintiff is within the provisions of the act. She claims to be a tenant in common of the-premises with the defendant. It is denied that she has any estate in the premises. Hqr title, whatever it is, is derived to her under the last will and testament of her father, Thomas O. H. Carpenter, bearing date the 13th day of June, 1839, and duly admitted to probate on the 8th day of October of the same year. The devise is as follows, viz: —

', “ Fifthly, I give and devise to my said daughter Henrietta Matilda Carpenter, to hold during her minority, or until she shall arrive to the age of twenty-one years, in case she shall not have arrived at that age at the time of my decease, all the residue and remainder of my real estate in the town of Coventry, to wit: my Baker Farm and my Morse Lot, and for par *476 ticular description of said real estate, and the boundaries and quantities of the same, reference being had to my deeds and conveyances thereof on record in said Coventry, the same will fully appear.
“ Sixthly. I give and devise to my two sons, viz: William L. Carpenter and Christopher S. Carpenter, my said Baker Farm and Morse Lot, to take and hold the same from the time my said daughter Henrietta’s term shall expire therein if any she shall have according to the above gift to her, during the term of their natural lives equally between them, and then to their children lawfully begotten, as follows, to wit: the one half of said real estate to the child or children of the said William L. Carpenter or their descendants, if any such there be, and to their heirs and assigns forever, and the other half to the child or children of the said Christopher S. Carpenter or their descendants, if any such there be, and to their heirs and assigns forever. Provided, however, that in case that either of my said sons, William L. Carpenter and Christopher S. Carpenter shall die, leaving no child or children or their descendants to take and hold as lawful hens the portion of said estate herein given to such deceased son, then the same shall go to the child or children lawfully begotten of the other of my last-named sons, or to their descendants, if any such there be, and to their heirs and assigns forever; but in case of the failure of said estate vesting in the legal descendants of the said William L. Carpenter and Christopher S. Carpenter in manner as aforesaid, then, and in such case, I give and devise said real estate to my said daughter Henrietta Matilda Carpenter as follows, viz.: to take and hold the one half of said estate upon the death of the first of my said sons, William and Christopher, and the other half of said estate upon the death of the other of my said, sons, which shall be and remain to her my said daughter Henrietta, and to her heirs and assigns forever, providing that she dies leaving lineal heirs of her body; but in case the said Henrietta Matilda shall die leaving no child or children or their descendants to take and hold said real estate as lawful heirs, then, and ill that case, I give and devise said real estate to my son Thomas O. H. Carpenter, Jr., and to my daughter Fanny H. Holden, equally between them, and to their heirs and assigns forever.”

*477 It was in evidence o'n the trial, that the daughter of the testator, Henrietta, the plaintiff, was, at the time of the testator’s decease, within the age of twenty-one years ; — that the said Christopher S. Carpenter, named in the devise, died before the commission of the alleged waste, having had one child, but leaving no child living at his death ; and that the said William L. Carpenter, named in said devise, is still living, having had no child. The plaintiffs claim, that under this demise, upon the death of Christopher S. Carpenter, an estate in one undivided half part of the premises, vested in Mrs. Wells, the plaintiff, and that the estate so vested was either an estate in fee-simple, or in fee-tail. The defendant insists, that no estate passed to her, but that the estate given by the devise to the said Christopher S. and William L. was an estate for their joint lives, and that upon the death of the said Christopher, the survivor, William L. Carpenter, succeeded to the whole for his life.

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

Wells Wife v. Fairbanks, 6 R.I. 474 (R.I. 1860).

6 R.I. 474 (Wells Wife v. Fairbanks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.