Dawkins v. Darnall

Offutt, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Walter I. Dawkins, lately a judge of the Supreme Bench of Baltimore City, died unmarried and without issue, but testate, in that city on February 10th, 1936. His will was in due course admitted to probate in the Orphans’ Court of Baltimore City, and letters testamentary upon the estate issued to R. Bennett Darnall and Charles F. Yaeger, who are also under the will trustees of his residuary estate. His nearest relatives living at his death were, in the order of their seniority, Frances A. Dawkins, Young P. Dawkins, and Mary Dawkins Michael, all children of a deceased brother.

The twenty-eighth clause of his will reads : “I would like those of my nearest (in order of Seniority) living ⁴⁴⁴ relatives to have the choice of any personal articles belonging to me at the most nominal appraisement. It is impossible to specify gifts to different ones however much I would desire the same to be cherished by them.” Young P. Dawkins, the nephew, construed the words “personal articles,” as used in that clause, as including the furnishings in the testator’s apartment, his books, pictures, engravings, linen, china, plate, coin and stamp collections, and similar chattels, and the words “most nominal appraisement” as meaning a consideration with no relation to the value of the chattels selected under the clause, but a consideration in name only, a mere trifling inconsiderable sum. The executors were not only unwilling to accept 'that construction of the clause, but were also in doubt as to the extent of the selective option given by the clause to the relatives to whom it applied. Accordingly, they filed the bill in this case against Young P. Dawkins, setting out in substance these facts, and in which they prayed. “(1) That a decree may be passed determining what portions, if any, of the tangible personal property set forth in the inventory of personal estate are covered by said designation of ‘personal articles.’ “(2) That a decree may be passed determining how said paragraph of the will should be carried out by the Executors, and what the right of the nearest of kin thereunder are. “ (8) That a decree may ‘be passed determining what is meant by the phrase ‘most nominal appraisement’ in said paragraph 28 of the will. “ (4) That a decree may be passed determining how the order of choice by the Testator’s nearest relatives should be adjusted, and whether the senior of such nearest relatives is entitled to take the whole of said personal articles, and, if so, at what price, and similarly as to the next in order of seniority of the said relatives, if any of such personal articles are not taken by the eldest of the said three nearest relatives. “(5) That your Orators may have such other and fur ⁴⁴⁵ ther relief as the nature of the case may require and to your Honors may seem meet.” The defendant answered, admitted the facts, and joined in the prayer of the bill.

There was filed with the bill an inventory showing the estate to have an. appraised value of $117,654.07, and a copy of the will. Testimony was taken which furnished formal proof of the facts recited supra, and at the close of the case the court decreed: (1) “That by the true construction of the Last Will and Testament of Walter I. Dawkins, Deceased, the phrase ‘any personal articles belonging to me’ in the 28th numbered paragraph of said will does not refer to tangible personal property generally, but is to be confined to articles worn or habitually and intimately used by the Testator, such 'as his gold fraternity pin, his Masonic pin, or family heirlooms, and that the expression ‘most nominal appraisement’ in said clause must be deemed and taken to refer to the official appraisement by the appraisers appointed by the Orphans Court as set forth in the inventory or inventories, that being the only official appraisement made.” And (2) “that the Defendant Frances A. Dawkins shall have the right to select one article or one set of articles out of the ‘personal articles’ as hereinabove defined, and to take the same upon payment to the Executors of the appraised value thereof as shown by the inventory, and that then the Defendant Young P. Dawkins shall have the right to select one article or one set of articles out of the remaining ‘personal articles’ as hereinabove defined, and to take the same upon payment to the Executors of the appraised value thereof as shown by the inventory, and that thereafter the Defendant Mary Dawkins Michael shall have the right to select one article or one set of articles out of the remaining ‘personal articles’ as hereinabove defined, and to take the same upon payment to the Executors of the appraised value thereof as shown by the inventory; provided that nothing herein contained shall prevent the Executors in the exercise of their discretion from selling any other personal articles or chattels to the Defendants ⁴⁴⁶ at the appraised value thereof as set forth in the inventory, or as may be authorized by the Orphans’ Cburt of Baltimore City,” and that the cause be retained (a) to carry out the decree, and (b) to determine any other question arising out of the administration of the estate requiring the determination of a court of equity. The appeal is from that decree. It is manifest from the whole tenor of the will that when Judge Dawkins spoke of “personal articles” he meant such articles as suggested a close intimate relation with him as an individual, which were associated with his presence, and which were used by him about his person for bodily comfort, convenience, or adornment (Mathis v. Causey, 172 Ga. 868 , 159 S. E. 240 , Words and Phrases), rather than chattels indiscriminately.

For, as stated by the chancellor in his clear and wisely reasoned opinion, it is not “reasonable to suppose the Judge wished to give (or sell at the most nominal appraisement) pots and pans, rugs which disappear with use, Balzac’s Works, or the Maryland Reports, or a bag full of coins, for example, to his nieces and nephew as appropriate articles ‘to be cherished by th,em.’ On the other hand it is clear that the Judge had no idea of enriching his