Hill v. Hill
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Blair county: Of May Term 1873, No. 63. This was an amicable action and case stated, in which Marcus L>. Hill and Sarah A. Hill his wife, in her right, were plaintiffs, and Ezra H. Hill was defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Blair county: Of May Term 1873, No. 63. This was an amicable action and case stated, in which Marcus L>. Hill and Sarah A. Hill his wife, in her right, were plaintiffs, and Ezra H. Hill was defendant. The action was instituted February 23d 1871. The facts appearing by the case were as follows:— Henry Lee, who died in or about April 1869, by his will dated in January of that year and proved in the succeeding April, amongst other things devised as follows:— “ I give and bequeath to my daughter, Sarah Ann, wife of Marcus Hill, and Nancy Jane Stewart, wife of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, July 2d 1873, by
Sharswood, J. —
There can be no doubt that by the devise of the premises, without the limitation over in case she should die leaving no issue or child, Sarah Ann Hill took a fee simple. Without a resort to the ninth section of the Act of April 8th 1833, Pamph. L. 249, the words “ all the remainder of my estate” were quite enough to indicate the intention of the testator. The provisions for the division of the real estate between his daughters and the contingent charge upon it of a sum in gross might either of them support the same…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eichelberger v. BarnitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kinney v. Oahu Sugar Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1919
- Hogg's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- King v. Savage Brick Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Swift's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Swift's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1923