Carlyle v. Cannon
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This was an action of ejectment for three undivided sixth parts of certain houses and lots in the city of Philadelphia, in which a verdict in favour of the plaintiff had been entered at JVisi Prius, subject to the opinion of the Court on the construction of the will of Alexander Carlyle.
Read the full summary
This was an action of ejectment for three undivided sixth parts of certain houses and lots in the city of Philadelphia, in which a verdict in favour of the plaintiff had been entered at JVisi Prius, subject to the opinion of the Court on the construction of the will of Alexander Carlyle. The facts agreed were, that William Renew, therein mentioned, died before the testator, and John Carlyle the testator’s nephew after; and that the plaintiff is the eldest son and heir of the said nephew. The defendants were tenants under the surviving executor. The following is a'copy of the will, viz. In the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Duncan J.
In this ejeetment the plaintiff claims to recover three sixth parts of the premises : that is his original sixth part, the sixth part devised to his father for life, who survived the testator, and the sixth part devised to ’William Renew for life, who died in testator’s life time.
He contends that had all the devisees for life survived the testator, *491then on the death of the testator, he would have taken estate in a special tail male, there being an estate or estates of freehold to support the remainder to him, but by the death of William Renew…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Paxton v. Benedum-Trees Oil Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
- Hyde v. RaineySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Hunt v. WilliamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
- Drusadow v. WildeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Schick EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.