TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Merrill v. Curtis

Merrill & A. v. Curtis & A.

Merrill v. Curtis, 39 A. 973 (N.H. 1897)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Hampshire · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 5, 1897
Judges
Chase
Citations
39 A. 97369 N.H. 206
Headnotes
Where a will provides that, after the death of the widow and all the children of the testator, a trust estate is to be divided between the children’s children and the legal representatives of such of them as are dead, the representatives of each child of the testator to take an equal share, the estate is to be divided, upon the happening of the contingency, into as many parts as there were children of the testator who left children then surviving, and the children of each of such children of the testator are entitled to one of the parts.
Summary
Bill in Equity, praying for direction in the execution of a trust. Jeremiah L. Robinson, late of Exeter, deceased, left a will containing the following provision : “ It is my will and I do hereby order and direct that the remaining three fourths part of all my estate shall be held by the said trustees, and all the rents, interest, and income thereof during the lifetime of my wife shall be divided by them semi-annually equally between my wife and my children and the legal representatives of such of them as may have deceased; and after the decease of my wife shall be divided by them semi-annually equally between my children and the legal representatives of such of them as may have deceased, so long as any one of my children shall be living; and when all my children are dead, then all my estate shall be divided by said trustees equally between their children and the legal representatives of such of them as may have deceased, giving to the representatives of each of my children an equal share.” The plaintiffs are the trustees under this provision. The widow and the four children of the testator are dead. The defendant Curtis is the only child of one of these children ; the four defendants, Brewers, are the only children of another, and the testator’s other two children left no child or issue of any child surviving them. The question is whether the defendant Curtis is entitled to one half or one fifth of the trust estate.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Chase

Chase, J.

After the death of the widow and all the children of the testator, the trust fund was to be divided between the children’s children and the legal representatives of such as may have died, giving to the representatives of each child of the testator an equal share. The children of a deceased child of the testator are the “ representatives ” of the child, within the meaning of the word as here used. The intention is clearly expressed. TJpon the happening of the contingency, the division is to he into as man^ equal parts as there were children of the testator who left children then surviving, and the children of each one of such children of the testator are entitled to one of the parts. As only two of the testator’s children left children surviving them, the division should be into two parts, of which Mrs. Curtis, as the sole representative of one child, is entitled to one, and the four Brewer children, as representatives of the other child, together are entitled to the other.

Case discharged.

All concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list