Lapsley v. Lapsley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the District Court of Allegheny. The material question in this ejectment arose under the will of Lapsley, whereby he devised certain land among his four sons equally, they paying a certain sum which he directed should be divided among his daughters.
Read the full summary
In error from the District Court of Allegheny. The material question in this ejectment arose under the will of Lapsley, whereby he devised certain land among his four sons equally, they paying a certain sum which he directed should be divided among his daughters. The will then continued, “ if any of my sons should die without issue, their part or portion shall be divided between thfe surviving brothers; also, if a daughter should die without issue, her part or portion shall be divided among her remaining sisters.” The plaintiff was the heir of Thomas, one of the testator’s sons, and claimed…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
We are satisfied that the construction put upon the Avill in question by the court below, is the right one; and the reasons therefor are so satisfactorily stated in the opinion of the judge before whom the cause was tried, that, upon this point, nothing more is called for than to add.to the authorities collected by him, the cases of Eichelberger v. Barnitz, 9 W. 450, and Langley v. Heald, 7 W. & S. 96. The determination, in Jackson v. Blanshan, 3 Johns. Rep. 292, cited by the counsel of the plaintiff in error, upon the effect of the word “survivors,” in a will, seems to be at variance with…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Langley v. HealdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
3Cited by13 opinions
- Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. RobertSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1962
- Vandergrift EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Fox's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Galli's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Bacon's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.