This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Testatrix devised half of her interest in certain farmlands to each of two of her husband's nephews. One of the nephews, Burtle, predeceased Testatrix. The other nephew, Wilson, sued to construe the devise of the farmland as a class gift so that he was entitled to Testatrix's entire interest in the land. He later conveyed the interest in the land which he allegedly derived from Burtle to Burtle's surviving children (P). The executrix and residual beneficiaries under the will (D), argue that the devise was a gift to the nephews individually and that the gift to Burtle, by reason of his death before Testatrix, passed into the residuary of the estate. The lower court found that Burtle's death prior to Testatrix's created a latent ambiguity in the will, and allowed extrinsic evidence regarding Testatrix's intent to create a class gift. This evidence established that Testatrix wanted the land to go to her husband's relatives and that she specifically named Burtle and Wilson because they were the only members of the husband's family with whom she had maintained contact. The court held that Testatrix had intended to make a gift to Burtle and Wilson as individuals, and the gift was therefore not a class gift. P appeals.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.