Horwitz v. Norris
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Certificate from Nisi Prius: In Equity: No. 46, to January Term 1867. > _ . > _ This was a bill in which Phineas J. Horwitz and Caroline his wife in her right, Elizabeth Norris, Serrill H. Brown and Adeline his wife in her right, Joseph Parker Norris (3d), Lamar W. Fisher, Caroline Norris (the said Lamar, Caroline Norris, Elizabeth and Joseph being devisees of Annie Fisher, deceased), the said Caroline Norris, Elizabeth, Adeline, Joseph and Annie being children of Joseph…
Read the full summary
Certificate from Nisi Prius: In Equity: No. 46, to January Term 1867. > _ . > _ This was a bill in which Phineas J. Horwitz and Caroline his wife in her right, Elizabeth Norris, Serrill H. Brown and Adeline his wife in her right, Joseph Parker Norris (3d), Lamar W. Fisher, Caroline Norris (the said Lamar, Caroline Norris, Elizabeth and Joseph being devisees of Annie Fisher, deceased), the said Caroline Norris, Elizabeth, Adeline, Joseph and Annie being children of Joseph Parker Norris, Jr., deceased, were complainants, and Charles Norris and Isaac Norris, trustees under the will of Joseph…
1Concurrence
*287Concurring opinion of
Sharswood, J.
— I concur in the decree in this case. But I do not concur in the construction of the will of Mr. Norris, which in any event will give a preference to the descendants of his son Joseph over those of his other sons. I think his intention to make them all equal abundantly appears. Wherever a general plan or design is clearly manifested, expressions carelessly or inartificially introduced, which are inconsistent with it, ought to be disregarded. That general design in this instance was that “ Fair Hill” should go to his sons and their descendants, and “ Sepviva”…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lewis's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838