Hurd's Estate
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
The wife not having survived the testator; her legacy lapses and becomes part, of the trust for the benefit of testator’s minor son: Comfort v. Mather, 2 W. & S. 450; Dickinson v. Purvis, 8 S. & R. 71; Muhlenberg’s App., 103 Pa. 587.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Simpson,
Testator and his wife were instantly and simultaneously killed in an automobile accident, leaving no issue of their marriage. They had each been previously married, however, and he left surviving one son by his first wife, while she had four children by her first husband, all of whom survived her.
In his will, testator provided, inter alia: “Third. All the rest and residue of my estate, I direct shall be divided into two equal parts: (a) One of these parts, I give, devise and bequeath to the Bank of Pittsburgh National Association, in trust, to invest and reinvest…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Gilmor's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Simpson's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Harrison's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Little v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Wunder's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- March EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Elkins' EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Estate of Marshall v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
- Walker's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Benefactor B. & L. Assn. v. LattaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.