History
  • No items yet
midpage
Rose v. Porter
141 Mass. 309
Mass.
1886
Check Treatment
Field, J.

We think that, by the terms of the will, the oldest son was not to take an interest in the property, and that it was left to the discretion of the two younger sons to do for him and his family whatever in their judgment “fraternal regard ” might *311require. The testator has not made it imperative that the two younger sons shall do anything for their older brother or his family, and has not defined what they shall do, if they choose to do anything; and there is clearly no trust for him or his family.

It is conceded that the wife of the testator deceased before the parties entered into the agreement, and it is unnecessary to determine whether, by the will, a trust was created for her during her life.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Rose v. Porter
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Mar 2, 1886
Citation: 141 Mass. 309
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.