Loring v. Marshall
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
484 N.E.2d 1315 (1985)
Marian Hovey’s will left the residue of her estate in trust. The trust income was paid in equal shares to her brother and sister, and solely to her sister for life upon her brother’s death. Upon her sister’s death, the income was paid to her two nephews in equal shares, and when one of her nephews died with no spouse or children, the other nephew, Cabot Jackson Morse, who was married and had one child, became the last surviving income beneficiary under Hovey’s will. The will also granted each of her nephews a special power to appoint his share of the trust to his “wife and issue,” payable upon the death of the last surviving income beneficiary with the restriction that the surviving wife could only receive the income for life. If either nephew died without a surviving wife or issue who could be appointees in his will, then the whole trust would be paid to the appointees in the other nephew’s will. However, if both nephews died without a surviving wife or issue, the trust was to be paid in equal shares, with certain restrictions to three charitable organizations. Cabot Jackson Morse (Morse Sr.) failed to fully exercise his power of appointment in his will. Although his son, Cabot Jackson Morse, Jr. (Morse Jr.) survived him and was the sole surviving potential appointee of the trust principal, Morse, Sr.’s will appointed the income to his wife, Anna Braden Morse, but made no appointment of the trust principal. Since the Supreme Judicial Court had determined in a previous ruling that the trust principal was not payable to the charities, the trustees sought instructions when the principal became distributable upon Anna Braden Morse’s death. The trustees asked the court whether the trust principal should be distributed to Morse, Jr., Anna Braden Morse’s estate, the intestate heirs of Hovey’s estate, the charities, or another distribution. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard the matter on reservation and report by a single justice of that court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Wilkins, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.