Blight v. Blight
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. In that court it was an amicable action between George Blight, executor, &e., of Maria Blight, deceased, plaintiff, and James H. Blight, executor and trustee, $sc., of Greorge Blight, deceased, in which the following case was stated:— George Blight, the elder, by will, dated 31st day of August 1834, duly probated, and considered as part of this case, inter alia, bequeathed as follows:— “ I give and bequeath to her, the said Maria…
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. In that court it was an amicable action between George Blight, executor, &e., of Maria Blight, deceased, plaintiff, and James H. Blight, executor and trustee, $sc., of Greorge Blight, deceased, in which the following case was stated:— George Blight, the elder, by will, dated 31st day of August 1834, duly probated, and considered as part of this case, inter alia, bequeathed as follows:— “ I give and bequeath to her, the said Maria Blight (the plaintiff’s testatrix), the annuity or yearly sum of $6000, to be paid to her in even and equal quarterly…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, by
Woodward, C. J.
The annuity in this case was to a surviving widow, “ in lieu and full satisfaction of all dower,” and was payable quarterly. She died in the midst of a quarter, and the question is, whether the annuity is apportionable.
The authorities so fully cited by the learned counsel of the plaintiff in error, prove the general rule of law to be that apportionment is not to be made of rents, dividends, annuities and other periodical payments becoming due at fixed intervals, but only of sums accruing de die in diem. But the same authorities…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Brownstein v. New York Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1930
- Nehls v. SauerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Henry v. HendersonMississippi Supreme Court · 1902