Finch v Hollingsworth
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 July 1855 |
| Date | 09 July 1855 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 52 E.R. 801
ROLLS COURT
S. C. 25 L. J. Ch. 55; 1 Jur. (N. S.) 718; 3 Eq. R. 993; 3 W. R. 589.
[112] finch v. hollingsworth. July 4, 9, 1855. ___ [S. C. 25 L. J. Ch. 55; 1 Jur. (N. S.) 718; 3 Eq. R. 993; 3 W. R. 589.] The report of the caae of Pope v. Whitcombe (3 Mer. 689) is inaccurate. A testator gave real and personal estate to A. for life, and afterwards to his own relations, in such shares as A. should by will appoint. A. appointed it amongst the testator's relations "living at her death," and who were not the testator's next of kin at his death. Held, that the appointment was valid. The testator, by his will, gave his residuary real and personal estate to his wife, Elizabeth Hales, for life, and after her decease he directed one equal moiety thereof to be conveyed and distributed amongst the relations of his said wife, and the other moiety to be conveyed, &c., "to his awn relations, in auch parts," &c., as his wife by her will should appoint. The testator died in 1815, at which time hia brothers James and Thomas were his sole next of kin, and they both died in the lifetime of the widow. In 1840 the widow made her will, by which, in exercise of the power of appointment over one moiety of her husband's property to " his own relations," she appointed to John, the son of the testator's brother James, 10, and unto all John's brothers and sisters and all other the relations of the testator (if any) living at her death (except Thomas Hales and John Hales thereinafter mentioned), the sum of 10 each; and she appointed all the residue of the said moiety unto Thomas and John Hales, the sons of the testator's brother, Thomas Hales. (1) Lard Kennaird v. Christie.-In this case some property had been sold in lots, with this condition:-"N.B.-As the title to all the preceding lots, except No. 5, is derived under one set of deeds, the purchaser of the largest lot is to be entitled to the custody of the title-deeds," &c. Lord Beauchamp purchased Lot 6 for 1430; Mr. Luard purchased Lot 2 for 1000 and Lot 3 for 520. Lord Eldon ordered the deeds to be delivered to Lord Beauchamp. R. v.-26 802 FINCH V. HOLLINGSWORTH 21BEAV. 113. The testator's widow died in 1841, and the question related to the validity of the appointment made by her will. Mr. Cole, for the Plaintiff. This is a power of distribution amongst the testator's "own relations" living [113] at his death. The expression "relations" is to be construed " next of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Re Patterson, Deceased. Dunlop v Greer
...8 Ves. 561 Daniel's Settlement 1 Ch. Div. 375. Eagles v. Le BretonELR L. R. 15 Eq. 148; 42 L. J. Ch. (N.S.) 362. Finch v. HollingsworthENR 21 Beav. 112. Grant v. LynamENR 4 Russ. 292. Greenwood v. Greenwood 5 Ch. Div. 954. Grey v. PearsonENR 6 H. L. C.61. Harding v. GlynENR 1 Atk. 469. Hard......
-
Bernard v Minshull
...v. Higgs (4 Ves. 708; S. C. affirmed on rehearing, 5 Id. 495 ; and on appeal, 8 Id. 561), Pope v. Whitambe (3 Mer. 689; S. C. corrected, 21 Beav. 112), Tiffin v. Longman (15 Beav. 275) and Finch v. Boilings-worth (21 Id. 112). But if the Court should be of opinion that no valid trust has be......
-
Lawlor v Henderson
...Grant v. LynamENR 4 Russ. 292. Pope v. WhitcombeENR 3 Mer. 689. Isaac v. Defriez Ambl. 595. [17 Ves. 373, n.] Finch v. HollinsworthENR 21 Beav. 112. Will — Construction — Relations — Power of selection or power of distribution. 150 THE IRISH REPORTS. Rolls. one, it would have got rid of the......
-
Blake v Blake
...180, 279. (2) 29 Beav 407. (3) 30 Beav. 14. (4) 24 Ch. D. 244. (1) 13 L. R. I. 408. (2) 3 De G. M. & G. 80. (3) [1904] 1 I. R. 360. (4) 21 Beav. 112. (5) Johns. (6) 2 Dr. & War. 89; 12 Cl. & Fin. 161. (7) [1899] 1 I. R. 324. (8) 9 L. R. I. 301. (1) I. R. 11 Eq. 180, 279. (2) 13 L. R. I. 408......