Legal Opinion
Tappan's Appeal from Probate
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 24, 1885PublishedCited by 18 opinions
Appeal from a probate decree denying the petition of the appellant for the distribution of a part of the estate of Catherine E. Pettengill as intestate estate; taken to the Superior Court. The appellees demurred to the reasons of appeal assigned, and the court reserved the case for the advice of this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtPark, C. J.
The questions controverted in this case grow out of the twelfth and residuary clauses of the will of Catharine A. Pettengill, late of the city of Bridgeport, deceased. The residuary clause is as follows:—
“After paying and satisfying all of the above provisions of this my last will and testament out of my estate, all of which is charged therewith, and my executors are hereby fully empowered to sell and convey any real estate or personal estate not specifically devised for the purpose of paying any of the above legacies, if necessary so to do, which shall be determined by the judge of probate,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Coit v. ComstockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
- Parker v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
3Cited by18 opinions
- Shannon v. EnoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Woodruff v. MarshSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Leake v. WatsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1891
- Wilson v. First National BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Belfield v. BoothSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.