Estate of Anderson

California Court of Appeal Sep 26, 1955 No. Civ. No. 5121Published

Before: Mussell

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the testamentary trust created in the fifth paragraph of the decedent's will was a conditional bequest, and because the beneficiary refused to perform the condition precedent of managing the business, the trust failed and the property became part of the residuary estate.

Issues

Whether the trust provision in the fifth paragraph of the will was a conditional bequest requiring the beneficiary to serve as manager of the business.
Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence of the circumstances surrounding the execution of the will to interpret the testator's intent.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“His employment as manager or superintendent, therefore, became a condition precedent to the operation of the trust.”

“The sole objective in the interpretation of the will is to ascertain the intention of the testator as disclosed by the language he has used.”

“Where, as here, the construction given to the will by the trial court is reasonable and appears to be consistent with the intent of the party making the will, the courts of appellate jurisdiction will not substitute another interpretation”

135 Cal.App.2d 642 (1955) Estate of JULIUS ANDERSON, Deceased. JOELLEN ANDERSON MORSE et al., Appellants,

AMY C. MURDOCK, as Executrix, etc., Respondent.

Civ. No. 5121. California Court of Appeals. Fourth Dist.

Sept. 26, 1955. Iverson & Hogoboom for Appellants.

McInnis, Hamilton & Fitzgerald for Respondent.

MUSSELL, J.

Julius Anderson died testate in the county of San Diego on or about November 2, 1945. Amy C. Murdock, one of his daughters, was appointed executrix of his will and acted in that capacity through the administration of the estate. On March 1, 1954, she filed her second and final account, report of executrix, petition for final distribution and for instructions. Joellen Anderson Morse and William Julius Anderson, beneficiaries under the will and appellants herein, filed exceptions to the account and to the proposed plan of distribution. This appeal is taken by them from the order settling the account and from the decree of distribution.

The decedent left three children, Amy C. Murdock, Helen J. Grondona, and Albert J. Anderson. In the seventh paragraph of the will, two-thirds of the residue of the estate of decedent was divided between the two daughters. The balance of one-third of the estate was to be placed in a trust with the First National Trust and Savings Bank of San Diego, as trustee, for the benefit of Albert J. Anderson. This trust is set forth in full in the sixth paragraph of the will, which provides in substance that one-third of the residue of the estate shall be paid over to the trustee and shall be held in trust free and clear of claims of creditors of Albert Anderson, and that there shall be paid to him the income thereof, or at least $100 per month, during his lifetime, even though such payments may consume all of the corpus of the trust. After the death of Albert Anderson, the income from the remainder, if any, of the trust funds is to be divided equally between his two children, Joellen Anderson and William Julius Anderson, the appellants herein. Upon the arrival of said children at the age of majority, they are to receive the corpus of the estate, share and share alike. If said children do not survive Albert Anderson and do not arrive at the age of majority, the corpus of the estate shall be paid to the two daughters of the testator. In case the trust shall fail or be declared invalid, or be set aside by the creditors of Albert Anderson, the corpus of the trust shall be paid to the two daughters of the testator.

Estate of Anderson

AI Brief

MUSSELL, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOTES

AI Brief