Legal Opinion · Dissent

Estate of Worthley

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided January 5, 1988Published

1DissentWathen, Justice

I must respectfully dissent. I agree that the will provision creates a power of appointment, but I do not agree that the power survives the death of one of the joint donees. It is my judgment that the Court has exceeded the proper bounds of interpretation and has, in effect, actually added a clause to Miss Worthley’s will. Although there is little authority directly on point, that fact does not justify the abandonment of any principled basis for the decision. We have previously defined a general power of appointment as a power given to a donee to appoint anyone, including himself, as the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wilson v. SnowSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Moore v. EmerySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1941
  3. Peter v. BeverlySupreme Court of the United States · 1836
  4. Bratton v. Trust Company of GeorgiaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  5. James v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API