Seymour v. McAvoy
Before: Fleet, Temple
Synopsis
Creditor’s Bill—Equitable Lien—Priority—Parties.—A judgment creditor, by filing a bill to subject equitable assets to the payment of his judgment, acquires an equitable lien on such assets, and a priority over any other creditor who has not already filed such a bill. Other-judgment creditors who have not filed such a bill, are not necessary parties to the action, and it is not error to refuse to bring them in as parties thereto.
Trust Under Will—Support of Beneficiaries—Estate Vested Prior to Code—Rules of Common Law.—Where the estate of the trustees of a trust created under a will, and the rights of beneficiaries to support out of the income of the trust estate, were vested by the death oí the testator prior to the adoption of the codes, the provisions of the Civil Code cannot have any retroactive effect to divest any of their rights. There being no statute in force upon the subject at the testator’s death, the case must be decided in accordance with the rules of the common law; and in ascertaining those rules resort may he had as well to the decisions in other states possessing the common law, as to those of the English courts.
Id.—Support Oct of Income—Nonsubjection to Creditors.—By the great weight of authority in America, it is settled that the author of a trust to pay or apply for the benefit of another the income of property or a portion of such income, may lawfully provide that the interest of the beneficiary shall not be assignable, or shall not be subject to the claims of creditors. Such provision need not be express; but may be implied from the general intention of the donor, to be gathered from the terms of the trust, in the light of all the circumstances.
Id.—Support of Widow and Daughters—Contingent Interests—Accumulation of Income—Discretion of Trustee—Implication as to Creditors. Where by the terms of a will establishing trusts, the only right of the widow is to a support for life out of one-half of the income, and the only right of each of the daughters of the testator is to a like support out of one-fourth of the income until her marriage, and to a contingent interest in one-fourth of the property, contingent upon her marriage, and in another fourth, contingent upon surviving her mother, and where, until those events occur, the trustees must accumulate the surplus income, and if neither of them occur, the property and accumulations are to he otherwise disposed of, and no sums out of the income are directed to he paid for the support of the widow or daughters, but the trustee himself is to expend the money, a provision that the interests of the beneficiaries shall not he subject to the claims of creditors is implied from the terms of the will; and no creditor of the widow or of either of the daughters can take any part of the income for their support without defeating the trust for that purpose, nor can any creditor of either daughter reach her contingent interests, which may never exist, nor take away any part of the surplus of the income, without defeating the trust for accumulation.
Opinion — Fleet
VAN FLEET, J. On the first day of January, 1869, William McAvoy' died, leaving surviving him, his widow, the defendant Margaret, and two minor children, the defendant^ .Emma -and Delia. He left a will which was admitted to probate on the twenty-seventh day of January, 1869, by the probate court' of the city and county of San Francisco, of which the material portions are as follows:
. “Item. I.give, devise, and bequeath all my property of every name, nature, and kind to my executors aforesaid in trust, to manage and control the same, and to keep the same invested for the following purposes:
“1st. To provide out of the income thereof for the comfortable support and maintenance of my beloved wife (it being my desire and wish that she shall convey and release to said executors all her interest in my estate and in the community property, -and upon her doing so she is to be provided with such support and maintenance) as one-half of such income will provide.
“2nd. To provide out of said income for the support and education of my two daughters.....
“4th. To' accumulate such income until the death of my beloved wife, or until one or both of my said daughters shall marry... Hpon the marriage of either daughter to make over to her, as her separate estate, one-fourth of the estate then in the- hands of said trustees, and upon the marriage of the other daughter to make over a like proportion, and upon the death of my b.eloved wife to. transfer .and make over a like residue of the, estate to my.said daughters share and share alike, or the children of the one which may die before her said mother’s death.”
On January 11, 1869, the defendant Margaret, in pursuance of. the request expressed in the will, conveyed to the executors all her interest in the property in trust to carry out the proT visions of said will. The court found, however, that William McAvoy died seised in fee of the property in question, and it follows that .the defendant Margaret had no interest in the property except such, if any, as she may have derived -under the will.
[441]On July 21, 1876, a decree of final distribution was entered, by which the property was distributed to the trustees named in the will (of whom the defendant Byrne is now the sole survivor), to have, hold, and dispose of in accordance with the terms and provisions of said will.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)