Simmons v Rose
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 29 June 1855 |
| Date | 29 June 1855 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 52 E.R. 772
ROLLS COURT
S. C. affirmed on appeal, 6 De G. M. & G. 411; 43 E. R. 1292; 25 L. J. Ch. 615; 2 Jur. N. S. 73. See Luckcraft v. Pridham, 1879, 48 L. J. Ch. 636.
[37] simmons v. rose. June 29, 1855. [S. C. affirmed on appeal, 6 De G. M. & G. 411 ; 43 E. R. 1292; 25 L. J. Ch. 615 ; 2 Jur. N. S. 73. See Litckcraft v. Pridham, 1879, 48 L. J. Ch. 636.] The testator, after directing payment of his debts, devised his real estate to his executors, upon trust to sell, and he directed that the produce should be deemed part of his personal estate, and that the rents, until the sale, should be deemed part of the annual income of his personal estate, and that the same moneys and rents should be subject to the disposition thereinafter made of his personal estate and the income thereof; and he bequeathed his personal estate to his trustees to invest it in consols, upon trust to pay certain legacies. Held, that the real and personal estate were blended, and applicable pari passu in payment of the debts and legacies. The testator, Lewis Rose, after directing payment of all his debts, devised the residue of his freehold and copyhold estates to trustees, their heirs and assigns, upon trust, as soon as conveniently might be after his decease, to sell and absolutely dispose of the same, and the testator directed that the moneys to arise from such sales should be deemed to be part of his personal estate, and that the rents and profits of the hereditaments, till their sale, " should be deemed to be part of the annual income of his personal estate," and that the same moneys, rents and profits should be subject to the dispositions thereinafter made concerning his personal estate, and the annual income thereof, respectively. And as touching his personal estate he bequeathed the same to his said trustees, upon trust to invest the same in consols, and pay certain legacies; and he appointed the trustees his executors. The testator died in 1853. The question which arose between the heir at law and next of kin was, whether, upon the construction of the testator's will, the debts and legacies were to be paid primarily out of the personal estate, or out of the real and personal estate rateably, as a common fund. Mr. Haynes, and Mr. Lewin, for the trustees. Mr. Lloyd and Mr. G. L. Russell, for the next of kin, [38] argued that the testator had directed a sale of the realty, and blended the real and personal estate, so as to render...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Simmon v Rose
...English Reports Citation: 43 E.R. 1292 BEFORE THE LORD CHANCELLOR LORD CRANWORTH. Simmon and Rose S. C. 21 Beav. 37; 25 L. J. Ch. 615; 2 Jur. N. S. 73. Explained, Luckcraft v. Pridham, 1879, 48 L. J. Ch. 636. [411] simmons v. rose. Before the Lord Chancellor Lord Cranworth. Jan. 11, 12, 18,......
-
Leonard v Dowling
... ... Walker (3). But the Court may find the intention without any express direction, as in Simmons v. Rose (4), where there were directions that the proceeds of the real estate should be considered as part of the personal estate, and in Allan v ... ...