Kelso v. Dickey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Franklin county. Charles W. Kelso, executor of Elizabeth Speer Kelso, against James Dickey. This was an action of debt for a legacy, in which the parties agreed to the following facts in the nature of a special verdict:— “ Sarah B. Huston, of Franklin county, by her will duly proved and registered in said county, dated 26th January 1825, devised, &c.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Franklin county. Charles W. Kelso, executor of Elizabeth Speer Kelso, against James Dickey. This was an action of debt for a legacy, in which the parties agreed to the following facts in the nature of a special verdict:— “ Sarah B. Huston, of Franklin county, by her will duly proved and registered in said county, dated 26th January 1825, devised, &c. (prout will). James Dickey and Charles Gillespie, trustees under said will, agreeably to the provisions of said will, sold the real estate of said testatrix and conveyed the same by deed dated the 1st day of April…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
1. In the events that have occurred, Elizabeth, the daughter of the testatrix,'having arrived at the age of 21, was entitled to receive the interest on the amount of her share of the estate which was sold. As to the principal and the interest after-wards accruing upon it, the right depends on the construction to be given to the provisions of the will that follow. “ And in case she lives unmarried to the age of 25 years, then the whole amount, principal and interest, to be paid to her; or, the whole amount to be paid to her on the birth of…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Crawford EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Packer's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Buzby's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
- Estate of MossSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Harris v. ParkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.