Case Name: NEWTON ET AL. v. McLAURIN, ADM'R
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1921-04-13
Citations: 116 S.C. 33
Docket Number: No. 10605
Parties: NEWTON ET AL. v. McLAURIN, ADM’R.
Judges: Mr. Justice Eraser concurs.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 116
Pages: 33–41

Head Matter:
No. 10605.
NEWTON ET AL. v. McLAURIN, ADM’R.
(106 S. E. 851)
1. Wills — Income on Hand at Life Tenant’s Death Held to go as Provided For Surplus Income, and Not to Remaindermen. — Under a will giving property to two daughters of the testatrix for life, and provided that the income should exceed enough to comfortably support them, or if one of them died, or married, the excess or surplus should be equally divided among the other living children, and that if either died or married the other should have the use of, so much of the estate as was necessary to support her, any balance of the income coming into the hands of the surviving life tenant’s executor should be distributed among the living brothers and sisters to the exclusion of the heirs or assignees of deceased brothers and sisters' entitled to share in the remainder.
2. Wills — Rent For Year in Which Life Tenant Died Held to go as Provided For Surplus Income.- — -Under a will giving property, to two daughters of the testatrix for life and providing that any surplus income beyond what was needed for their comfortable support should be divided among the other living children, where the surviving life tenant had leased land for the year in which she died, taking a note maturing after her death, such rent was income to be paid to the living brothers and sisters.
Before McIver, J., Marlboro, May, 1920.
Affirmed.
Action by Mrs. Elizabeth Newton, Mrs. Katherine Teague and Mrs. Nora Jane Peele against Julian G. Mc-Laurin, as Administrator C. T. A. of Mary Gibson, deceased. From judgment for plaintiffs the defendant appeals.
Mary Gibson died many years ago, leaving certain real estate, and sons and daughters, some, of whom are parties hereto. She also left a will, which is copied in the case. Penelope Gibson outlived Miranda Gibson, dying March 8, 1917, neither of them having married. After her death, as stated in the complaint, the respondents and others, heirs at law of the testatrix, brought suit for the sale of the land and the division of the proceeds among them and the other heirs of the testatrix and their assigns, which was ac cordiiigly granted by the Court. The land had, however, before the death of Penelope, been rented out for 1917, the lessee having given the appellant a note for the. rent, due November, 1917, in the amount of $1,900, which was paid at maturity. The funds in the hands of the administrator at the death of Penelope Gibson, and received by him after that time, are correctly stated in the return of the respondent. As appears from the returns filed by the administrator,' his commissions of $95 were taken from the gross sum in his hands, as were also the taxes on the land, which would amount to $33.06, and stamps on deed, amounting to $29.
The question was whether the surviving brothers and sisters of Penelope Gibson would take all of the funds, including the entire rent for 1917, or whether the remainder-men and their assigns (among whom were, of course, such survivors) would take the proportionate part of the rent for 1917 determined by the time of the death of Penelope Gibson. The case was heard by Hon. Edward Mclver, Circuit Judge, by consent, on a rule issued against the appellant.
The following is the will of Mary Gibson:
State of South Carolina, Marlboro County.
Know all men by these presents, that I, Mary Gibson, of the State and county aforesaid, being weak and feeble, but of perfect mind and memory, do make and ordain this my last will and testament in the manner and form as follows, viz: 1st. After all my just debts are paid I will and bequeath to my daughters, Miranda Gibson and Penelope Gibson, the use of all my property, both real and personal, during their natural lives, provided they never marry. If both my daughters should marry, whose names are above written, it is my will that my estate, both real- and personal, be equally divided between my children and the heirs of their body, share and share alike. It is my will that should the income from my estate exceed enough'to comfortably support my daughters, Miranda Gibson and Penelope Gibson, or one of them, should one of them die or marry, the said excess or surplus I will to be equally divided among the rest of my children then living. It is my will that if either of my daughters, Miranda Gibson or Penelope Gib-, 'son, should die or marry, the remaining single one have the use of my estate or so much of it as is necessary to support her during her natural life, provided she remain single. I do hereby appoint my trusty friend and nephew, Raiford Gibson,-executor to this my last will and testament, hoping and confiding in him that he will carry the same into effect according to the intent and meaning. This 23rd day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-seven.
The following is the Circuit Court decree:
The above-stated matter comes on to be heard before me by agreement of all parties. The right of either party to have the same heard by Judge Townsend, who issued the rule, being expressly waived. After due consideration of the petition and the return thereto-, and full argument by counsel for both sides, I arn clearly of the opinion that it was the intention of the testatrix, Mary Gibson, that all income accruing from her estate should be applied priamrily to the comlfortable support and maintenance of her two daughters, Miranda and Penelope, during the lifetime of the survivors, and that any balance of the fund coming into the hands of the executor or his successors for that purpose should upon the death of the survivor of the two be distributed among their surviving brothers and sisters to the exclusion of the heirs at law or assignees of those brothers and sisters who predeceased Penelope, the survivor of the two prime beneficiaries.
I hold that the rent which was paid or secured to the executor for the year 1917 was income in the hands of said executor dedicated by the terms of the will to the support and maintenance of Miranda and Penelope, and that the same, together with any balance from' previous years, must be distributed among the petitioners, the four surviving brothers and sisters, pro rata, in accordance with ■ the plain direction of the will, and it is so ordered, adjudged and decreed.
Messrs. McColl & Stevenson, for appellant,
cite: Rent is an incident to the ownership of the soil; and estate of a life tenant is entitled to rents accrued to date of death of such life tenant: 94 S- C. 158; 11 Rich. Eq. 31; Sec. 3494-96, 1 Civil Code 1912. In 33 C. 258, rent went to devisee and not to executor of deceased owner. Life tenants not entitled to rent after death even if note had been previously given: 112 S. C. 211; 99 S. E. 817. Tenant for life in nature of trustee and purchaser from him stands in the same relation: 2 McC. Eq. 149.
Messrs. Townsend & Rogers, for respondents.
Oral argument.
April 13, 1921.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
Eor the reasons assigned by Hon. Edward Mclver, Circuit Judge, it is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.
Mr. Justice Eraser concurs.