Case Name: LYONS et al. v. WEEKS et al.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1900-07-17
Citations: 65 N.Y.S. 818
Docket Number: 
Parties: LYONS et al. v. WEEKS et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 65
Pages: 818–825

Head Matter:
LYONS et al. v. WEEKS et al.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
July 17, 1900.)
Wills—Construction—Intention or Testator.
Testator, being 78 years old, devised certain land to his son for life,, remainder to the son’s wife and children, share and share alike; “the issue of such as may have died to take the share to which his parent would have been entitled.” Held, that testator’s evident intention was that, on the death of a child occurring after his own demise and before that of his son, its issue should take, since testator’s advanced age, as compared with that of his grandchildren, renders inapplicable the ordinary rule that a gift over in case of death refers to a death happening during the lifetime of testator.
Patterson, J., dissenting.
Appeal from trial term, New York county.
Ejectment by Alma B. Lyons and others, by guardian, against • George W. Weeks and others. From a judgment in favor of defendants, and from an order denying a motion for a new tidal (61 N. Y. Supp. 441), plaintiffs appeal.
Reversed.
Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and McLAUGHLLN, PATTERSON, O’BRIEN, and INGRAHAM, JJ.
Wm. B. Hamilton, for appellants.
F. B. Candler, for respondents.

Opinion:
INGRAHAM, J.
The rule which I consider as decisive of the construction to be given to this will is stated by Judge Andrews in Vanderzee v. Slingerland, 103 N. Y. 56, 8 N. E. 249, that:
"Where the context of the will is silent, and affords no indication of intention, other than that disclosed by words of absolute gift, followed by a gift over in case of death, or of death without issue, or oth.er specified event, the death over must be considered as a death happening before the death of the testator."
And, while this rule is well recognized, still, as Judge Andrews says, "the tendency is to lay hold of slight circumstances in the Avill to vary the construction, and to give effect to the language according to its natural import." It is apparent to those whose duty it is to construe instruments of this character that the enforcement of this rule often changes the disposition of property from that which the testator had in view when he made the will. That period when there is a bequest or devise of this character generally is that of the final disposition of the estate after the death of the life tenant, and it is of that period that a testator speaks when he provides for a devolution of interest upon the death of the remainder-man. That this has been recognized is, I believe, the cause of the tendency to vary the construction imposed by this rule where there is any consideration which, from the position, age, or condition of the testator and those interested, or from the will itself, would indicate that the testator had in view the death of the remainder-man before the termination of the life estate, rather than during his life. Now, in this will all of the surrounding circumstances would indicate that the testator could not have intended to refer to the death of the children of Jacob Weeks Cornwell during his own life. The testator was 78 years of age when he made the will, and died about 4 months after its execution. Jacob Weeks Cornwell, the life beneficiary, was his adopted son, many years younger; and, from the age and condition of the children of Jacob Weeks Cornwell, it is not probable that the testator contemplated their dying before him. In making provision for his adopted son and his family, he did not give to his adopted son power to dispose of the property, from which such provision was to be obtained, but himself disposed of it; thus indicating his intention to determine the manner In which the property should be ultimately disposed of. Upon the death of the adopted son the property was to be divided equally between his widow and children. Each was to have a quarter,, but, to keep this property in the family and prevent its being dissipated, he provided that, if either of those entitled to the remainder should die, the issue of the one dying should take the parent's share. This was not a case where the testator could have expected to live many years, or could expect to see his grandchildren, for whom he intended to make provision, grow up and die during his life. It was the will of an old man upon the brink of the grave, providing for those near and dear to him, by provisions which, as appears from the whole will, he endeavored, so far as possible, to preserve for those that he desired to benefit Then the language that is used is significant. The clause in question comes immediately after the gift to the remainder-men, and is in connection with that gift, which is not to take effect until the death of the life tenant. It is "upon his [the life tenant's] death" that the property is given to the four remainder-men; and it is in connection with that gift upon the life tenant's death that there is a direction that the issue of such as' may have died is to take the share to which his, her, or their parent living would have been entitled. The language used affords an indication of a like intention. It is "the issue of such as may have died to take." It seems to me that this language indicates that it is to those who may have died before the death of the life tenant, when the property is to come into the possession of the remainder-men, that was in the mind of the testator, and the whole of the will seems to confirm such an intention. Again and again the testator uses this, or substantially a like, phrase, to indicate his intention of substituting the issue for the parent in the event of the death of the latter, in cases in which he could not have contemplated the death of the parent during his (the testator's) life.
The judgment is therefore reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the result.
VAN BRUNT, P. J., concurs.