Court Opinion

ID: 9810800
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:59:31.723628+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:13.923163
License: Public Domain

Douglas., J.,
dissenting.
I can not assent to the judgment of the Court that the church trustees should pay the costs of this appeal. In fact, they are about the last persons that should pay it. They were not the original actors. They have not brought any suit for the money in controversy, but were apparently made parties to an action originally brought by the heirs-at-law and next of kin against the executrix. The opinion of the Court intimates that these trustees do not want the money — “That they did not in so many words decline the gift, and that is about all that can be said for the answer.” Suppose they had declined the gift, could we make them accept it ? or impose any penalty for their refusing to do so ? The defendants appealed, but whether these trustees or the executrix were the active appellants, I do not know. The result of the appeal is the remanding of the case to see if in some way the money can not be given to the trustees on such terms as will carry out the in-*243teution of tbe testator. To tbis extent their appeal, if it is their appeal, has been successful. Then why should they pay the costs? The action has arisen over the impossibility of strictly carrying out the wishes of the testator, who stipulated for more than his money’s worth. I think under all the circumstances that the costs should be paid out of the fund.