Case ID: yeates_2/html/0433-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Pwr «<f.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Kissiah Sample widow of John Sample against John Sample and Chambers Sample.
    Devise by tostator to his wife, not expressed to be in lieu of her dower, and where her claim of dower is not inconsistent with, and repugnant to the devise she is entitled to her dower.
    Case stated in, dower of lands in Cumberland county.
    John Sample, the late husband of the demandant, being seized of the lands in question, made his will dated 3d September 1792, and thereby devised to her sundry specific articles, and also “ 200i. to be paid to her in cash, one year after the sale of his real estate.” He then directs, that his wife Kissiah and his three sons John, Chambers and Samuel and his daughter Elizabeth, should live together on his real estate, and equally enjoy the profits thereof, until the said sons John and Chambers should come to the age of twenty-one years. He then directs, that all his real estate should be sold by his executors, and the money arising therefrom, together with the residue of his personal estate, after the above legacies and his just debts and funeral expenses should be paid, be given to his three youngest sons J ohn, Chambers and Samuel, to be equally divided between them, &e.
    The demandant received from the executors, the specific articles devised to her, and also 54Z. 8s. 2d. in four several payments; and the question submitted to the court without argument, was whether the demandant was entitled to dower 1
    
    Mr. Ingersoll, for the demandant.
    Mr. Duncan, for the tenants.
   Pwr «<f.

It does not necessarily follow from the words of the will, that the 200Z. to be paid to the widow was to be raised out of the sale of the real estate. It is possible such was the testator’s intention, but he has not expressed it. It may be, volmit sed non dixit; the words are, that the money shall be paid one year after the sale of his real estate. It does not appear to us, that there is such an absolute inconsistency and repugnancy in this devise to her claim of dower, as can bar her right at common law.

Judgment for the demandant.