In Re Estate of Zucker
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
CIRILLO, President Judge Emeritus,
dissenting:
¶ 1 I respectfully dissent. The gift to the Foremans fails according to its own terms. Contrary to the majority’s finding, it is not apparent from the language of the will that the testator “gave and intended to give absolutely to each of his [remainder-man].” Bald Estate, 385 Pa. 176, 180, 122 A.2d 294, 296 (1956). The testator’s intent was to primarily benefit his daughter and not the remainderman. In this case, the testator did not make “an unqualified, absolute gift of a pecuniary legacy” to the Foremans. Id. There were conditions, limitations…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- McCauley's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Mulliken v. EarnshawSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Matter of Estate of BloughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Bald EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- In Re Estate of JacobsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.