Fitzhenry v Bonner
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 November 1853 |
| Date | 11 November 1853 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 61 E.R. 631
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 2 Eq. R. 454; 2 W. R. 30. See Cropton v. Davies, 1869, L. R. 4 C. P. 167; In re Thomson's Trusts, 1870, L, R. 11 Eq. 148.
Will. Construction. Implication. Estate Implied.
[36] FlTZHENRY . BONNER. Nw. 11, 1853. [S. C. 2 Eq. R. 454; 2 W. R. 30. See Oropton, v. Dames, 1869, L. R. 4 C. P. 167 ; In re Thomson's Trusts, 1870, L, R. 11 Eq. 148.] Will. Construction. Implication. Estate Implied. A testator gave his residue to his wife for her and her son's support, clothing and education, until he should attain twenty-one. If he died under twenty-one, then he gave all the interest of his Bank stock to his wife for life; after her death he gave all his property to his daughter. 632 ITTZHENBY t?. BONNEE 2DKEWRY.3T. Heldj that tbe son did not take any estate by implication on attaining twenty-one; but there was an intestacy. This case came on upon a petition on the construction of the will of R. J. C. Herries, by which the testator, after directing the payment of his debts, &c., gave all his personal estate and effects to trustees upon trust as followed. The will then proceeded :-- "I give and bequeath all the yearly interest arising from my said property to my wife, Mary Herries, for her and my son's, Robert Charles Herries, support, clothing and education, until my aforesaid son shall arrive at the lawful age of twenty-one years. Should my son die before he arrives at the age of twenty-one years, I will and bequeath the whole interest of my Bank stock to my wife, Mary Herries, for life. At the death of my wife Mary I will and bequeath the whole of my property, of whatever kind, to my reputed daughter, Mrs. William Scott, to be settled on her by iny aforesaid executors, independent of her present husband or any future husband she may have during her lifetime." Mr. Karslake (with him Mr. Bacon), for the Petitioner. The question is whether the son, who attained twenty-one and died, took an estate by implication on attaining twenty-one. To shew that such an implication arose, he referred to Goodright v. Hoskins (9 East, 306), Newland v. Shepherd (2 P. Will. 194), Peat v. Powell (Amb. 382), Harman v. Didcenson (1 Br. C. C. 91), Langston v. Langstm (8 Bl. H. L. C. 167). [37] Mr. Glasse and Mr. Eddis, for Mrs. Scott, cited Davis v. Davis (1 Russ. & M. 645) and Cooper v. Pitcher (4 Hare, 485). Mr. Campbell, for Mary Richardson, the widow of Colonel Herries, the testator. 1st. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
James v Shannon
...H. L. C. 81. Baker v. BakerENR 6 H. L. C. 616. Davis v. DavisENR 1 Russ. & M. 645. Fitzhenry v. Bonner Tud. L. C. 580. Bowring's TrustsENR 2 Drew. 36. Gardner v. Sheldon W. N. June 1st, 1867. Brown v. De Laet 4 Br. C. C. 534. Doe v. Summerset 5 Bur. 2608; 2 W. Bl. 692. King v. Ringstead 9 B......
- Betts v Conolly
-
Tunaley v Roch
...(3 Lev. 125), Edwards v. Champion (1 De G. & Sm. 75), Hart v. Tribe (18 Beav. 215), Doe v. Cwndall (9 East, 400), Fits Henry v. Banner (2 Drew. 36). the ViCE-GHANCELLOK [Sir E. T. Kindersley]. I adhere to the general proposition which I acted on in Fitz Henry v. Banner. In this case I must ......
-
Sambourne v Barry
...2 Cl. & Fin. 195. Keogh v. Keogh Ir. R. 8 Eq. 179. Townly v. BoltonENR 1 M. & W. 148. Ex parte Dubost 18 Ves. 140. Fitzhenry v. BonnerENR 2 DRew. 36. Gravenor v. WatkinsELR L. R. 6 C. P. 500. Will — Construction — Estate by implication — Bequests on trusts of settlement. 140 Mt IRISH 411201......