Rotheram v Rotheram
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 March 1859 |
| Date | 25 March 1859 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 53 E.R. 977
ROLLS COURT
Held overruled, Gibbins v. Eyden, 1869, L. R. 7 Eq. 374. Dissented from, Clark v. Clark, 1865, 34 L. J.Ch. 477.
[465] rotheram v. rotheram. March 25, 1859. [Held overruled, Gibbins v. Eyden, 1869, L. R. 7 Eq. 374. Dissented from, Clark v. Clark, 1865, 34 L. J. Ch. 477.] Since the Wills Act (1 Viet. c. 26), real estate passing by a residuary devise is subject to debts in priority of specific legacies, that statute rendering a residuary devise no longer specific. By his will, dated in 1848, the testator gave and bequeathed all his household furniture, plate, linen and china to the Plaintiff (his widow) absolutely. He gave legacies of 500 each to his sons, and devised his freehold and copyhold hereditaments at Berkeswell to his widow durante viduitate, with remainder to his daughters. And he devised and bequeathed all the residua of his real and personal estate to his wife durante vidititate, with remainder to his children equally. 978 MOLLETT V. ENEQUIST 38 BEAV. 486. The testator died in 1853, and his personal estate (2450) was insufficient to pay his debts (6000, of which XI900 were specialty), and the question was, whether the personalty specifically bequeathed to the widow or the real estate passing under the residuary gift was first applicable to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
West v Lawday
...Clark v. Clark 11 Jur. N. S. 820. Daly v. HartridgeENR 1 Dr. & Sm. 236. Barnwell v. IremongerENR 1 Dr. & Sm. 242. Rotheram v. RotheramENR 26 Beav. 465. Hensman v. FryerELRELR L. R. 2 Eq. 627; S. C. on Appeal, L. R. 3 Ch. App. 421. Paterson v. Scott D. M. & G. 531. Foster v. CookENR 3 Bro. C......
-
West v Lawday
...v. Scaiffe 2 M. & Cr. 695. Dady v. HartridgeENR 1 Dr. & Sm. 236. Barnwell v. IremongerENR 1 Dr. & Sm. 242. Rotheram v. RotheramENR 26 Beav. 465. Bethell v. GreeneENR 34 Beav. 302. Hensman v. Fryer L. N. 2 Eq. 627. See this case on appeal, reported W. N., 7th December, 1867. Harris v. Watkin......
-
Lord Lilford v Powys Keck
...not been definitely determined, the decisions on the point being conflicting; Dacly v. Hartridge (1 Dru. & Sm. 236); Rotheram v. Rotheram (26 Beav. 465); Eddelsv. Johnson (\ Giff. 22); Pear-man v. Twins (2 Giff. 130); Ennes v. Smith (2 De G. & Sm. 722, 735); Mirehouse v. Scaife (2 Myl. & Cr......
-
Bethell v Green
...debts. Mr. Fry, for the Plaintiff, a creditor, called the attention of the Court to the conflicting authority of Rotheram v. Rotheram (26 Beav. 465); Daily v. Hartridge (1 Drew. & Sw. 236); Pearmain v. Twiss (2 Giff. 130). Mr. Jessel, for Edward Norman, the residuary devisee and legatee, ar......