Security Trust Co. v. Irvine
1953 Del. Ch. LEXIS 105, 33 Del. Ch. 375, 93 A.2d 528 (1953)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The law presumes that a remainder interest in an estate vests at the time of the testator's death, not at the termination of a life estate, unless the will shows a clear and unambiguous intent to the contrary. A life tenant who is also a member of the class designated to receive the remainder is not excluded from that class without a similarly clear and unambiguous expression of intent to exclude them.
Facts:
- On October 25, 1915, James Wilson executed a will devising his real and mixed estate into a trust.
- The will granted a life estate in the trust to his two sisters, Martha B. Wilson and Mary E. Wilson, and the survivor of them.
- The will provided that if another sister, Margaret W. Irvine, became a widow, she would share equally in the life estate.
- The will specified that upon the death of the surviving life tenant, the remaining estate was to be 'equally divided among my brothers and sisters, share and share alike, their heirs and assigns forever, the issue of any deceased brother or sister to take his or her parent’s share.'
- James Wilson died on July 29, 1918, survived by his five siblings: Samuel, Margaret, Martha, Mary, and Henry.
- All of the testator's siblings, including the two life tenants, predeceased the final life tenant, Mary E. Wilson, who died on August 18, 1951.
- The life tenants, Martha and Mary, as well as their sister Margaret, died without issue.
- The testator's brothers, Samuel and Henry, died leaving issue.
Procedural Posture:
- Security Trust Company, the trustee of James Wilson's estate, filed a complaint in the Delaware Court of Chancery (a court of first instance).
- The trustee sought instructions from the court on how to properly distribute the trust's residuary estate following the death of the last life tenant, Mary E. Wilson.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a testator's will, which grants a life estate to two sisters and then directs the remainder to be divided 'among my brothers and sisters,' create a remainder that vests at the time of the testator's death and includes the two life tenants as members of the beneficiary class?
Opinions:
Majority - Bramhall, Vice Chancellor
Yes. The remainder vested at the death of the testator, and the life tenants are included in the class of 'brothers and sisters' entitled to share in it. The court's reasoning is grounded in two strong presumptions of will construction. First, the law favors the early vesting of estates and presumes that interests vest at the testator's death unless the will manifests a clear and unambiguous intent to postpone vesting. The will's use of language like 'upon the death of' refers to the time of enjoyment or possession, not the substance or timing of the devise itself, and is insufficient to overcome this presumption. Second, the fact that a life tenant is also a member of the remainder class does not, by itself, indicate an intent to exclude them from that class. The will must contain a clear and unambiguous provision to exclude them, which was absent here. Because the remainder interests of the sisters who died without issue were vested and not subject to any divesting condition, their shares pass to their respective estates.
Analysis:
This case strongly reaffirms Delaware's commitment to the rule favoring the early vesting of estates. It establishes that courts will not infer an intent to delay vesting or exclude beneficiaries based on potential incongruities, such as a life tenant also being a remainderman. The decision places a high burden on will drafters to use explicit and unambiguous language if they wish to create contingent remainders or exclude specific members from a class gift. This provides clarity and predictability in estate litigation by prioritizing established construction rules over speculative inquiries into the testator's unstated intentions.
