Waldron v Boulter
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 28 May 1856 |
| Date | 28 May 1856 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 52 E.R. 1117
ROLLS COURT
See In re Hutchinson's Trusts, 1882, 21 Ch. D. 815.
[284] waldron v. boulter. May 28, 1856. [See In re Hutchinson's Truxtx, 1882, 21 Ch. D. 815.] A testator bequeathed leaseholds equally to his four grandchildren, and after their decease, to " such lawful issue " as they or any or either of them should leave. Held, that on the death of each grandchild, his issue of every degree then living became equally entitled to his one-fourth, and that issue was not to be read " children," though in a subsequent gift he had used that expression. Under a similar devise of renewable leaseholds and copyholds to the four grandchildren equally, and after their death, " for such children as they or any or either of them should leave her or him surviving." Held, that on the death of each grandchild, his "children " then surviving took as tenants in common. The testator bequeathed a leasehold property to trustees, upon trust to pay and divide the rents " equally between and amongst his four grandchildren, Thomas, Mary, Penelope and Susannah." And he proceeded thus :-" And from and after the decease of my said grandchildren, in trust for such lawful issue as they, or any or either of them, shall leave, lawfully begotten, as tenants in common." The testator afterwards gave and devised some renewable leasehold and a copyhold messuage called Woodwale to his said trustees, upon trust to pay and apply the rents " equally between and among " the same four grandchildren, share and share alike. He proceeded thus :-" And from and after the death of my said grandchildren, then in trust for such children as they, or any or either of them shall leave her or him surviving, as tenants in common, and if but one such child, then the whole to that child." The testator died in 1803. Mary died in 1811, Susannah in 1840, Penelope in 1854, and Thomas in 1855. They all left children, and some of them left grandchildren surviving them. Questions arose as to the constructions of their bequests, which now came on for argument. [285] Mr. Bruce, for the Plaintiffs, referred to Arrow v. Mellish (1 De G. & Sm. 355), Abrey v. Newman (16 Beav. 431). Mr. Berkeley contended, that " issue " in the first bequest was to be construed " children," and, therefore, that the grandchildren of the four grandchildren were excluded. He cited Farmer v. Francis (2 Sim. & Stu. 505). Secondly, that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Louisa Taaffe and Others, - Appellants; Catherine Conmee, - Respondent
...of the testator, a consequence which most certainly it was his object to avoid. In the Court below, the case of Waldron v. Boulter [71] (22 Beav. 284) wag relied on, but there the limitation over was on the death of the grandchildren, " or any or either of them," so that the two cases are q......
-
Conmee v Taaffe
...206. Barker v. GilesENR 2 P. Wms. 280. Burden v. Barville 2 East's Term Rep. 47. Bigley v. CookeENR 3 Drew. 662. Waldron v. BoulterENR 22 Beav. 284. 338 CHANCERY REPORTS. 1861. Chancery. CONMEE v. TAAFFE. (In Chancery.) Feb. 14. A testator de- JOHN FERRALL, being seised of considerable esta......
-
The 11 & 12 Vict. C. 68, and Denis' Trusts
...11 Sim. 168. Farrant v. NicholsENR 9 Beav. 327. Leigh v. Norbury 13 Ves. 340. Howard's TrustsUNK 7 Ir. Ch. Rep. 344. Waldron v. BoulterENR 22 Beav. 284. Freeman v. Parsley 3 Ves. 421. Hockley v. Mawbey 1 Ves. Jun. 150. Sibley v. Percy 7 Ves. 522. Campbell v. Sandys 1 Sch. & Lef. 281. Marria......
-
Howard's Trusts
...Smith v. Vaughan 2 Eq. Cas. Abr., 543, pl. 16. Spencer v. Bullock 2 Ves. jun. 687. Barber v. Barber 3 M. & Cr. 697. Waldron v. BoulterENR 22 Beav. 284. South v. Searle 2 Jur., N. S., 390. Woodcock v. The Duke of Dorset 3 Br. C. C. 569. Hope v. Lord Clifden 6 Ves. 508. Heron v. Stokes 2 Dr. ......