Court Opinion

ID: 9706839
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 01:52:55.275108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:41:37.760487
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Eagen:
I cannot agree with the majority’s conclusion that the codicillary gift to the appellant-executrix was a residuary legacy. It is clear to me that when the testratrix was dealing with the specific fund of her husband’s estate, she directed and intended that the necessary portion thereof be used to pay the taxes due and that the balance be paid to appellant as a specific gift. Since, as of the date of the execution of the codicil, she could not have known the amount of money necessary to satisfy the tax due, the bequest was as specific as it could possibly be.