Henry's Estate
53 Pa. Super. 57 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1913
We are of opinion that the orphans’ court correctly held that, according to the doctrine of the later cases, particularly Mulliken v. Earnshaw, 209 Pa. 226, the remainders created by the will of John Henry, deceased, were contingent, and, therefore, that the decree of April 1, 1911, was improvidently entered. The decree vacating it, from which this appeal was taken, is affirmed for the reasons given in the opinion of the orphans’ court. •