Lessee of Harris v. Potts
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
The following case was stated for the opinion of the court. • Stephen Hubbert being seized in fee of the premises, made on the 30th December 1761, his last will and testament in writing duly executed, whereby he devised as follows, after directing, that in case the provision made ®for his father and mother should prove insufficient for their livelihood, the sum of 7I. yearly should be paid them out of the yearly rents and profits of his estate: “Item, I give and bequeath to…
Read the full summary
The following case was stated for the opinion of the court. • Stephen Hubbert being seized in fee of the premises, made on the 30th December 1761, his last will and testament in writing duly executed, whereby he devised as follows, after directing, that in case the provision made ®for his father and mother should prove insufficient for their livelihood, the sum of 7I. yearly should be paid them out of the yearly rents and profits of his estate: “Item, I give and bequeath to my cousin John Camp“bell the sum of iool., to be paid him when he shall arrive to “ the age of 21 years. Item, I give…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Elizabeth Davis takes an estate for life only in the plantation in controversy. The superadded words “and “to her male heir,” are not words of limitation of her estate, but are expressly declared by the testator, to mark out her son Thomas Davis, “ in case he shall live to come of age and enjoy it.” Those expressions, therefore, are designations of the person, and the cases cited on this head fully prove it. Considering the will and codicil together, Thomas Davis would have taken an estate in fee tail in the premises, on his coming of full age and enjoying the same ; and this…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Waldron v. WahlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Samson's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Dunwoodie v. ReedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817