Manderson v. Lukens
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court, Philadelphia. This was an action of assumpsit, in which Andrew, Thomas, and James Manderson, executors of the will of Peter Browne, deceased, were plaintiffs, and Charles Lukens was defendant. The following facts were agreed upon, and stated for the opinion of the Court.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court, Philadelphia. This was an action of assumpsit, in which Andrew, Thomas, and James Manderson, executors of the will of Peter Browne, deceased, were plaintiffs, and Charles Lukens was defendant. The following facts were agreed upon, and stated for the opinion of the Court. John C. Browne, late of the county of Philadelphia, being seised of the real estate in question, made his last will and testament, dated on the 22d day of September, 1819, and the codicils thereto dated March 2, 1825, and August 4, 1832, made a part of this case. He thereby devised the use,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Lowrie, J.
The plaintiffs’ right .of action depends upon the will of John C. Browne. He devised all his real estate to his *33wife during her life or widowhood, and “whenever her death or marriage should take pláce,” it was to be equally divided among his children “which may be then alive, or who may have left legitimate heirs.” Two of the children died intestate and without issue, and then the widow sold her interest to her only remaining son Peter, who afterwards died leaving issue, his mother being then still alive. If Peter thus acquired a full title,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kerlin's Lessee v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1786
3Cited by26 opinions
- Taylor v. TaylorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Thorne's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- McGlinn's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Raleigh's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Walker's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.