Tidwell v Ariel and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 November 1818 |
| Date | 19 November 1818 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 56 E.R. 553
COURT OF THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND
See Waite v. Templer, 1829, 2 Sim. 530; In re Porter's Trust, 1857, 4 K. & J. 193.
[403] tidwell v. ariel and others. Nov. 19, 1818. [See Waite v. Templer, 1829, 2 Sim. 530; In re Porter's Trust, 1857, 4 K. & J. 193.] A legacy to A. of 600 to be paid at the end of one year after the testator's death, or to her respective heir, held to be lapsed by the death of A. in the lifetime of the testator. The bill stated that the Plaintiff, Samuel Tidwell, was the only child and heir of Dorothy Tidwell, one of the daughters and legatee of David Kirkby ; that the testator, David Kirkby, by his will, 14th October 1812, among other things, gave and bequeathed to George Jackson, and George Mackareth, two of the Defendants, all his bills, bonds, book debts, goods, chattels or whatsoever to him belonging or appertaining at his decease (except as therein is excepted), in trust nevertheless in confidence reposed in them, to and for [404] such uses, intents, ends and purposes, as he had thereinafter mentioned; and he thereby willed, ordered and directed his said trustees, George Jackson and George Mackareth, and the survivor of them, and their heirs, to pay and apply the same in payment of such legacies as he had thereafter in his said will given and bequeathed ; and after giving to his wife a sum of 200 to will and dispose of as she should think meet at his decease, and directing his said trustees, George Jackson and George Mackareth, and the survivor of them, and their heirs, to place out at interest and invest in good security the sum of 500, and to pay the interest thereof to his son Miles Kirkby during his life, the testator gave and bequeathed to his son David Kirkby the sum of 300, and he also gave and bequeathed to his daughter Elizabeth, the wife of William Ariel, the sum of 600, and also to his daughter Jane, the wife of Richard Derry, the sum of 600, and also to his daughter Mary Fen ton, widow, the sum of 600, and also to his daughter Ann V.-C. I.-18* 554 TIDWELL V. ARIEL 3 MADD. 408. the sum of 300, and he also gave and bequeathed to his said daughter Dorothy, then the wife of Plaintiff, T. L. Tidwell, the sum of 600, and also to his grandson David Kirkby, son of his late son William Kirkby, deceased, the sum of 100, and also he gave and bequeathed to Defendant, George Mackareth, the sum of 20; all which said several and respective legacies the said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
King v Cleaveland
...those living, and the legal personal representatives of those who were dead. [479] They referred to and commented upon Tidwell v. Arid (3 Madd. 403); Re Parleys Trust (4 K. & J. 188); Btme, v. Cook (M'Cl. 168); Gorbyn v. French (4 Ves. * DE G. * J. 80. KING V. CLEAVELAND 187 418); OmUhurat ......
-
Porter's Trust and The Trustee Relief Act
...legatees, if they should survive; and if they should not, to their "heirs," as they were called in his will. Now, does Tidwell v. Ariel (3 Madd. 403) require me to adopt a different view upon the question whether the bequest is substitutional in the case now before me 1 It is clear that Tid......
-
Thompson v Whitelock
...gift in the event of a' legatee dying before his legacy became payable; Gittinys v. M'Df/rmolt (2 M. & K. 69). Tid'well v. Ariel (3 Madd. 403), is distinguishable^the gift there was to the j.iat. thompson v. whitelock 193 original legatee simply, and afterwards followed a auperadded directi......
-
The Estate of William Neary and William Patrick Sheridan, Trustees for Sale Under The Will and Codicils of Michael Reilly, Deceased, Owners; ex parte Samuel Bomford and John Maunsell, Petitioners
...Montgomery 2 Ir. Eq. R. 161, 164. Billings v. SandomENR 1 Bro. C. C. 394. In re Porter's TrustENR 4 K. & J. 188, 195. Tidwell v. ArielENR 3 Madd. 403. Nowlan v. NelliganENR 1 Bro. C. C. 489. Smart v. ClarkENR 3 Russ. 365. Salisbury v. PettyENR 3 Hare, 86. Johnson v. AntrobusENR 21 Beav. 556......