Robert Barker, - Appellant; Nathaniel Gyles, et Al - Respondents
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 April 1727 |
| Date | 22 April 1727 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 1 E.R. 1206
House of Lords
Mew's Dig. xv. 1363.
J. S. devises lands to be sold for payment of his debts and legacies, and the surplus to be laid out in the purchase of other lands, to be settled on A. and B. and the survivor of them and their heirs, equally to be divided between them, share and share alike. A. died in the lifetime of the testator, and the question was, Whether his moiety should descend to the testator's heir at law, as a lapsed devise, or should go to B. the surviving devisee? Held, that the first part of the devise made A. and B. plainly joint-tenants; and therefore B. by survivorship became entitled to the whole for life; but that the inheritance being devised to them as tenants in common, one moiety having lapsed by A.'s death, in the life-time of the testator, shall descend to the testator's heir at law, expectant on the death of B., and that the other moiety shall go to the heir of B.
[104] case 25.-egbert barker,-Appellant; nathaniel gyles, et al.- Respondents [22d April 1727]. [Mew's Dig. xv. 1363.] [J. S. devises lands to be sold for payment of his debts and legacies, and the surplus to be laid out in the purchase of other lands, to be settled on A. and B. and the survivor of them and their heirs, equally to be divided between them, share and share alike. A. died in the lifetime of the testator, and the question was, Whether his moiety should descend to the :, testator's heir at law, as a lapsed devise, or should go to B. the surviving devisee? Held, that the first part of the devise made A. and B. plainly joint-tenants; and therefore B. by survivorship became entitled to the whole for life; but that the inheritance being devised to them as tenants in common, one moiety having lapsed by A.'s death, in the lifetime of the testator, shall descend to the testator's heir at law, expectant on the death of B., and that the other moiety shall go to the heir of B.] 2 Wms. 280. 9 Mod. 157. Yiner, vol. 14. p. 487. ca. 18. 2 Eq. Ab. 536. ca. 4. Robert Barker, being seised of a real estate and possessed of a considerable personal estate, by his will, dated the 26th of September 1716, gave and devised to the respondents Gyles and Smith, their heirs and executors, all his manor of Everleigh in the county of Wilts, then in mortgage, and all his right, equity of redemption, etc. in and to the same, and also his personal estate whatsoever; in trust, to sell and dispose of the said real and personal estate, and by and out of the monies to be raised by such sale, and out of the rents and profits of the real estate...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robert Barker against Giles and Smith
...88 E.R. 374 IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMOM PLEAS, AND EXCHEQUER. Robert Barker against Giles and Smith S. C. affirmed, 3 Bro. P. C. 104 (2nd ed.). Applied, Doe d. Littlewood v. Green, 1838, 4 M. & W. 245. [157] case 72. robert barker against giles and smith. Friday, 4th Jun......