Legal Opinion

Conner's Estate

Pennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County

Decided January 29, 1926No. 656Published

1Opinion of the Court

Van Dusen, J.,

The two clauses under discussion are so flatly contradictory that the attempt to reconcile them is not satisfactory. It may be surmised that the draftsman of the will submitted both clauses to the testatrix for her choice, and that the retention of both in the completed will was an inadvertence. The courts must make the choice, and the last clause is to prevail for two reasons:

1. Because it is the last, which is the rule to be followed in cases of “irreconcilable repugnancy:” Weltmer’s Estate, 1 Pears. 415; Grimm’s Estate, 6 Dist. R. 21; Lewis’s Estate, 3 Wh. 162; Patterson v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Estate of WhiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
  2. Lewis's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
  3. Patterson v. SwallowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
  4. In re Weltmer's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Dauphin County · 1861

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API