Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

114 Pa. 586

Jones v. Cable

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1887

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1887-01-03

2, of Allegheny county: Of October Term, 1886, No. 165. Ejectment for the undivided three fourths of the undivided one half of one hundred and thirty-three acres of land situated in Allegheny county brought by Samuel J. Jones and Hattie Jones his wife, in right of said Hattie Jones, George L. Rose and.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1887-01-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 1968 · most notably Maxwell v. Saylor (1948), Redemptorist Fathers v. Lawler (1903)

1 district · 25 state decisions

80188718901900191019201930194019501960decided

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 →

Mr. Justice Paxson

¶1delivered the opinion of the court,

¶2John Cable, the testator, devised his farm to his two sons iu the following words: “I give and bequeath unto my two sons John and Edward Cable, all my farm after my death to them as long as they do live, and after their death to their children,” etc.

¶3Our construction of this will is that John and Edward take a life estate, with remainder to their children as purchasers, upon the death of the survivor. It is plain that this was the intention of the testator, for the devise over to the children does not take effect until after “their” death, which evidently means the death of the survivor. It is true the Act of 1812 has abolished joint tenancy in this state, but that Act has never been held to prevent a testator creating a joint tenancy by the express language of his will, or by necessary implication. On the contrary it was held in Arnold v. Jack's Executors, 24 Penn. St. R., 57,'that while survivorship as an incident to joint tenancy was abolished by the Act of 1812, it may be expressly given by will or deed. The third survivorship results as a necessary implication from this will so far as the life estate is concerned, and as Edward Cable has survived John, and is still living, it is clear the plaintiffs cannot recover the possession of any portion of this farm at present, whatever may be their lights upon the death of Edward.

¶4This is as far as it is necessary for us to go at present.

¶5Judgment affirmed.

/114/pa/586 · .json · Public domain