¶1The testator, in the fifth clause of his will, by directing his executors to procure a suitable residence for his daughter Julia at an expense not exceeding six thousand dollars, and to hold the same in trust for her and her son William “ during their lives; ” and, “ upon the decease of both,” devising said property over; clearly gave that daughter and her son an interest during their joint lives and the life of the survivor, which on her death before the testator’s did not lapse, but went to her son for life. Prescott v. Prescott, 7 Met. 141. Loring v. Coolidge, 99 Mass. 191. This devise to William was not varied by the-second codicil, which mentioned the death of his mother, increased a bequest made to his father by another article of the will, and one made to the Warren Academy by the first codicil, and expressly confirmed the will and the first codicil in all other respects. * ' Decree accordingly.
103 Mass. 489
Dow v. Doyle
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 15, 1870
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1870-01-15
<p>A testator directed his executors to procure a residence for a married daughter, at an expense not exceeding a certain sum, and hold the same in trust for her and her son “ during their lives,” and “upon the decease of both ” gave the property over. The daughter died, and the testator made a codicil reciting her death, and increasing a bequest made to her husband, but expressly confirming the will. Held, that the gift did not lapse by the daughter’s death, but went to her son for life.</p>
Relies on Loring v. Coolidge
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1870-01-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 1968
15 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →