Child v. Child
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill ih equity, filed April 7, 1903, by the executors under the will of Samuel G. Child, late of Boston, praying that i.t might be decreed that Samuel G. Child at the time of his death had a vested interest in the trust created by article twelve of the will of James Guild, and that the sum of $7,500, being the proceeds of the sale of such interest, should be paid to the plaintiffs as executors under the will of Samuel G. Child; also that the plaintiffs might be released and…
Read the full summary
Bill ih equity, filed April 7, 1903, by the executors under the will of Samuel G. Child, late of Boston, praying that i.t might be decreed that Samuel G. Child at the time of his death had a vested interest in the trust created by article twelve of the will of James Guild, and that the sum of $7,500, being the proceeds of the sale of such interest, should be paid to the plaintiffs as executors under the will of Samuel G. Child; also that the plaintiffs might be released and discharged from the agreement and bond mentioned below. The case came on to be heard upon the bill and answer before…
1Opinion of the CourtLoring-, J.
It is plain that if the words “ such of ” had not been inserted in the twelfth clause of the will, the plaintiffs’ testator would have had a remainder vested subject to b,e divested by his dying leaving issue him surviving at the date of his decease.
It is also plain that a mistake has been made in drafting the will. The sentence and limitation which were begun by the words “such of” stand unfinished and incomplete.
And finally it is plain that the mistake was either in the insertion of these words or in the omission of the description and limitation begun by them.
The surviving children of Mary…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Metcalf v. First Parish in FraminghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Bradlee v. AndrewsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Towle v. DelanoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Donnell v. Newburyport Homœopathic HospitalMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
3Cited by16 opinions
- King v. Viscoloid Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Fitts v. PowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Sanger v. BourkeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Bailey v. BaileyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Springfield Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. DwellyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.