Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

will
defendantwill

Related Cases

In re Certain Scholarship Funds, 133 N.H. 227, 575 A.2d 1325, 90 A.L.R.4th 811, 61 Ed. Law Rep. 149
View Case »
Jackson v. Phillips, 14 Allen 539, 96 Mass. 539, 1867 WL 5527
View Case »
In re Trusts for McDonald, 100 A.D.3d 1349, 953 N.Y.S.2d 751, 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 07430
View Case »
Goodwin v. Coddington, 8 E.H. Smith 283, 154 N.Y. 283, 48 N.E. 729
View Case »
Plimpton v. Gerrard, 668 A.2d 882
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Prowitt v. Rodman, 10 Tiffany 42, 37 N.Y. 42, 1867 WL 6500, 4 Transc.App. 412

Facts

Thomas Mackaness executed a will on February 15, 1806, and died before March 19, 1807. He had three daughters: Elizabeth, Mary Prowitt, and Margaret. At the time of his death, Mrs. Prowitt had three children, all of whom predeceased her, leaving behind grandchildren. The will specified that property given to Mrs. Prowitt would go to her 'children' living at her death, leading to a dispute over whether this included her grandchildren.

At the death of the testator Mrs. Harvey had two children living, and Mrs. Prowitt had three. Mrs. Mary Prowitt outlived both of her sisters. She also outlived all her children, but left grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Issue

The main legal issue was whether the term 'children' in the will referred only to the immediate offspring of Mary Prowitt or also included her grandchildren and remoter descendants.

The first question before us arises upon the provisions of the second section of the will.

Rule

The court ruled that the term 'children' could be interpreted to mean 'lawful issue' or remoter descendants, depending on the testator's intent as gathered from the will's language.

The expression 'children then living,' may mean 'lawful issue,' or remoter descendants, if such was the intention of the testator, to be gathered from other parts of his will.

Analysis

The court analyzed the language of the will, noting that the testator's intent was to provide for all of Mrs. Prowitt's descendants, not just her immediate children. The use of terms like 'lawful issue' and the context of the will indicated that the testator intended for the property to pass to grandchildren if the immediate children were not living at the time of Mrs. Prowitt's death.

In my judgment it explains the intent of all the prior provisions respecting the descent to the issue of Mrs. Prowitt and effectually determines their character.

Conclusion

The court concluded that the descendants of Mrs. Prowitt, including her grandchildren, were entitled to inherit the property as per the testator's intent, affirming the lower court's judgment in favor of Mrs. Prowitt's descendants.

I think the testator intended that the remote descendants should be takers under the sections of the will which I have discussed, if there should be a failure of the immediate offspring of Mrs. Prowitt.

Who won?

Mrs. Prowitt's descendants prevailed in the case because the court found that the testator intended for the term 'children' to include remoter descendants, allowing them to inherit the property.

The case was tried at the Special Term, where judgment was rendered in favor of Mrs. Prowitt's descendants, and adversely to the defendants, Mary Rodman and others.

You must be