|
|
|
|
|
|
|
708 TESTAMENTARY LAW. [ART. XCIII
326.
A testator is presumed to have known that by the death of his daughter
(before the testator), what he had intended as her share had gone to his
three surviving children under his will, or that it would lapse or be saved
from lapsing by this section; in either event the children of another
deceased daughter of the testator would take what would have been their
mother's share in the estate of the daughter first mentioned if she had
survived the testator. Duering v. Brill, 127 Md. 112.
It is presumed that a testator made his will in view of this section. and
that he intended in the event his wife was not living at the time of his
death that his estate should go to those who were her heirs or next of
kin at his death, unless a contrary intention appears; no such intent held
to appear. This section applied. See notes to sections 301 and 336.
Eedwood v. Howison, 129 Md. 593.
To the first note to this section beginning on page 2149 of volume 2 of
the Annotated Code, add Eedwood v. Howison, 129 Md. 588.
327.
This section held to have no application to a will because it appeared
from the clear language of the will that the testator intended to devise a
life estate only. Pattison v. Farley, 130 Md. 411.
An absolute estate held to pass by a will under this section; cases dis-
tinguished. Effect of this section Johns Hopkins University v. Garrett,
128 Md. 347.
To the second note to this section on page 2150 of volume 2 of the Anno-
tated Code, add Williams v. Armiger, 129 Md. 230.
328.
A corporation held to have been formed in substantial compliance with
this section and with the will. The statute of 43 Elizabeth, chapter 4,
known as the "Statute of Charitable Uses," is not in force in Maryland.
The law to the effect that, independent of that statute, equity could not, in
the exercise of its ordinary jurisdiction, sustain and enforce a bequest to
charitable uses, which, if not a charity would be void, held good in Mary-
land until this section abolished, under certain conditions, the rule as to
uncertainty under which so many devises and bequests to charitable uses
had been stricken down. If a will passes property to a corporation for its
general corporate purposes and uses, which are charitable uses or legal
charities, such devise or bequest is valid. Will held not to create a trust.
Gray v. Orphans' Home, 128 Md. 595.
A legacy held void since this section was not applicable. Novak v.
Orphans' Home, etc., 123 Md. 165.
330.
To the last note to this section on page 2151 of volume 2 of the Anno-
tated Code, add Krieg v. McComas, 126 Md. 382.
332.
To the first note to this section on page 2152 of volume 2 of the Anno-
tated Code, add Duering v. Brill, 127 Md. 109.
332A.
This section referred to in construing a deed under the Rule in Shelley's
Case and the Statute of Uses. Exception to sale sustained. Williams v.
Armiger, 129 Md. 226.
336.
A devise or bequest of all the testator's real or personal property passes
all of his property which he could dispose of by will at the time of his
death. Redwood v. Howison, 129 Md. 590.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
