Case ID: misc_49/html/0201-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Church, S.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Matter of the Estate of John Woolsey, Deceased.
    (Surrogate’s Court, Kings County,
    January, 1906.)
    Wills — Interpretation — Description of persons — Particular terms of doubtful meaning — Gift to class — To what time referred.
    A will providing that the entire estate, upon the termination of a trust for life to testator’s wife and sister, should go to his nephews and nieces who might be living and a niece of his wife and the lawful issue of those who had died, speaks from the testator’s death and not from the date of the termination of the trust.
    
      Proceeding for the judicial settlement of the accounts of an executor.
    Frederick Cobb, for executor, petitioner.
    Thomas H. Troy, special guardian, C. L. Schenck et al.
    Grasmuck & Ostrander, for Charlotte W. Betjemar, Eleanor A. Schonten, Sarah M. Ewald, Emma W. Fortune and Eliza Gallagher.
    James W. Glendinning, for Wm. BE. Woolsey.
    O. B. Gould, guardian ad litem of Evanita S. Schlieder, an infant.
   Church, S.

The only question arising upon this accounting is one as to the construction of the will of the deceased. BEe created a trust in such will to exist during the lifetime of his wife and sister, and provided that, upon the cessation of the same, the entire estate should go “ to my nieces and nephews who may be living and the niece of my said wife, Helen Heath, and the lawful issue of those who havé died.” At the time of the testator’s death, he left surviving twelve nieces and nephews, and also the said Helen Heath. At the time of the death of his wife, Lydia Woolsey, which terminated the trust, he left surviving four nephews and nieces and the said Helen Heath.

The contention is now advanced that such will should speak from the date of the termination of the trust and not from the testator’s death. I am unable to agree with this proposition. The cardinal rule of construction as to the time from which a will is presumed to speak fixes it at the death of the testator. There is nothing in this will which shows any contrary intention, but, on the other hand, there is a provision that the said estate is to go to the testator’s nephews and nieces and, in addition, to the lawful issue of those who have died.

Unless it spoke from the time of the testator’s death, the provision as to the lawful issue of those who have died is absolutely meaningless. In fact, it is worse than meaningless, because, in order to properly interpret the will, it would have to be completely expunged from the same.

Let a decree be entered in accordance with the foregoing views.

Decreed accordingly.