Everitt's Estate
Everitt's Estate
Opinion of the Court
Wo are clearly of opinion that Mary A. LaBaare, the sister of the deceased, was excluded by clause “ D ” of the will from all participation in the residue of the estate, and that clause “ G ” did not restore her to the class called “next of kin,” so as to enable her to take under that description. We are equally clear that the testator only intended his next of kin who
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.
Reference
- Cited By
- 15 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Will—Construction—Next of kin. Testator devised his estate to his executor mostly for the benefit of his only child, a son. He then directed as follows: “ At the death of my said son, all my estate will go to and immediately become vested in his lawful children, then living, and the issue of any that may be dead, such issue to take their parent’s share by representation, and in ease he shall die leaving no children or issue as aforesaid, then all my estate shall go to and immediately become vested in my next of kin, then living, share and share alike, including issue born to my brother B. and his second wife.” By another clause in the will he directed his executor to transfer to his sister M. a note of M.’s son, and further directed that “ this shall be considered as the only share she is to have out of my estate.” Testator’s son died shortly after testator, intestate and without issue. At the time of testator’s death his sister M. was living, and also numerous nephews and nieces of deceased brothers and sisters, and also grandnephews and grandnieces. Held, that the sister M. was excluded from participation in the residue of the estate and that the estate should be distributed to his nephews and nieces living at the death of the son, to the exclusion of grandnephews and grandnieces.