Weller v. Sokol
Maryland Court of Appeals
318 A.2d 193 (1974)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Arthur Nattans was married to Jennie Nattans. The couple had five children. Arthur also had three children from a prior marriage, Emily Herbert, Addie Bachrach, and Samuel Nattans. Arthur’s will established a trust with his shares of stock of Read Drug and Chemical Company of Baltimore City. The will left a specific number of shares for each child—different for each child—and directed the trustee to pay income from each child’s shares to that child. The will provided that if Arthur’s children died during the existence of the trust, income from the deceased child’s shares would pass to any children (i.e., Arthur’s grandchildren) that child had. Finally, the will provided that the trust would cease upon the death of Arthur’s last surviving child. At that point, the will directed the trustees to divide the trust’s assets among the issue and descendants of Arthur’s children per stirpes. Harold Herbert and Arthur Bachrach, Arthur’s grandsons, died without issue before the termination of the trust. Their right to trust income passed to their respective estates while the trust still existed. The chancery court found that distribution of the trust corpus was to be among only those descendants still alive at the time the trust ceased.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Singley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.