Legal Opinion

McKelvy v. Terry

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 14, 1976PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKaplan, J.

This is another in a series of cases testing on varying facts whether donees of powers of appointment have meant to exercise their powers or have succeeded in doing so. In the present case, an inter vivas instrument created a special or limited power of appointment that might be exercised by the donee by will referring to the power. A judge of the Probate Court held, in the particular circumstances, that the power was effectively exercised by a residuary clause of the donee’s will embracing by its terms any property as to which the donee had a power of appointment under any instrument. We…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. National Shawmut Bank v. JoyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  2. Putnam v. PutnamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  3. Pitman v. PitmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  4. Boston Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. PrindleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  5. Fiduciary Trust Co. v. First National Bank of Colorado SpringsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Shawmut Bank, N.A. v. BuckleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  2. Cross v. CrossMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. Hershman-Tcherepnin v. TcherepninMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  4. First National Bank of McMinn County v. WalkerTennessee Supreme Court · 1980
  5. First Natl. Bk. of Mount Dora v. Shawmut Bk. of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API