Mcgee v. Mcgee

413 A.2d 72 (1980)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Administrator, Richard (P) sought a declaratory judgment for the construction of certain provisions and payments of debt and distribution of assets of the will of his mother, Claire. In the will, Claire gave Hurd $20,000. She also gave all of her shares of stock in the Texaco Company, and any and all monies standing in my name on deposit in any banking institution in three equal shares to her children's (Philip, Richard, and Joseph) children. A substantial sum of money was on deposit in her name. Five weeks prior to death, Richard, by written power of attorney, withdrew approximately $50,000 from these savings accounts and purchased Treasury bonds for estate tax purposes. The gross estate incurred no federal tax liability. The remainder was deposited in Claire’s account for debts and future obligations. P sought instructions concerning whether the estate should first satisfy the specific legacy to the grandchildren from the proceeds of the sale of the flower bonds or whether he should first pay the $20,000 bequest to Hurd since the estate lacked assets sufficient to satisfy both bequests. The trial justice found that the bequest to the grandchildren constituted a specific legacy. He held that Rhode Island regarded the concept of ademption with disfavor and he sought, therefore, to effectuate the intent of Claire. Under the assumption that one intends to leave his property to those who are the natural objects of his bounty, rather than to strangers, the administrator 'should trace the funds used to purchase the Bonds and should satisfy the specific legacy to the grandchildren.' Thus, the legacy to Hurd must fail. Hurd appealed.