Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1915-04-16
Court Opinions.

cree filed in the Circuit Court here by
Judge E. C. Peter in the case of Robert R.
Moore ct al, VS.. Sarah T. M. Adams.
This cause was submitted for a decree
upon bill, answer and an agreed state
ment of facts, and it had for its object. in
the first place, to obtain construction of
certain provisions contained in the re-
siduary clause of the will of the late VIM.
W. Moore, and, in the second place, in the
event it is determined trust is thereby
created, such trust may be administered
under the direction and control of the Court
Under the residuary clause of the will
the plaintiffs, R. Rowland Moore and Re-
becca I. Stabler, are each entitled to have
and receive one-third of the residue of the
said testator's estate absolutely; that the
said Robert R. Moore is entitled to receive
and hold the remaining one-third part of
the residue of the said testator's estate in
trust, to invest the same in a secure man
ner, and to pay the income arising there
from to the defendant. Sarah 7. M. Adams,
during her life, and in case she should be
injured by accident or she should suffer
from any continuous illness to pay to her
such of the principal of said trust fund as
may be absolutely necessary to make her
comfortable and upon the death of the
said Sarah T. M. Adams, the said trustee
shall pay over the whole or so much of
said trust fund as may then remain I'M
expended to himself and the plaintiff
Rebecca 7. Stabler. in equal portions.
Further. that said trust be administered
under the Jurisdiction and control of this
Court, and that the said trustee upon the
receipt of said trust fund promptly report
to this Court, and that he thereafter invest
and from time to time re-invest the same
under the direction of the Court, and that
he annually fully report to the Court all
things that may have been done by him in
connection with his administration of said
trust.
Judge Peter also filed an opinion in the
case Of VIM. H. Riley ct al. VS.. Vim. W.
Riley ct al. in which he says
This is proceeding to obtain a parti-
tion of two pieces of land, situate in Mont
eomery county, of which Thomas W. Riley
died seized and possessed, the one, herein
referred to as Lot 1. containing about So
acres. lying on the west side of the Seventh
Street Pike; and the other, herein referred
to as Lot 2, containing about 202 acres
and lying on the east side of the same road.
1T is conceded by all of the parties that
Lot will have to be sold in order that an
equitable partition thereof can be made
among them.
in their bill the plaintiffs allege that
Lot l is susceptible of partition in kind
In their answers the defendants, Elizabeth
Young and Raymond Riley. admit, while
the defendants, VIM. W. Riley Thomas r
Riley, Mary S. Riley and Jane A. Riley
deny this allegation. Thus the single issue
to be tried in this case is raised, and that
issue is purely one of fact
"A decree will be passed directing a sale
of Lot and partition in kind of Lot 1.
so that, in the opinion of the only wit
nesses entitled to be classed as experts, the
property, if partitioned, would be more
valuable and bring more money than if il
was sold as a whole, and with their opin
ion the Court agrees. The location of this
property makes ii especially desirable fol-
small farms or villa sites. and, in my
opinion, it is more valuable for such pur
poses than any other 1t is too remote
from Washington city to be divided ant
sold off in town lots at profit"