Pierce

Pierce v. Spaulding

Good Law
1967 Cal. App. LEXIS 1901·256 Cal. App. 2d 647·64 Cal. Rptr. 195
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 5, 1967Civ. No. 31780California2,215 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Herndon, J.

This is an appeal from that portion of an order of the probate court entered on June 3, 1966, which directed the trustee of a testamentary trust to distribute to respondent Laura Elaine Canfield Pierce one-half of the principal of the trust estate remaining in the hands of the trustee on June 15,1965.

The resolution of the controversy presented to the court below by the parties to this appeal involved the construction of the distributive provisions of an order of the probate court which was entered more than 53 years ago and which was designed to create the trust in conformity with the decedent’s testamentary directions as contained in his will dated August 29, 1912. The duty devolving upon this court of review is to decide whether or not the interpretation the court below placed upon the language of the distributive provisions of the trust was a reasonable and tenable construction. Having made our own independent evaluation of the divergent construe *649 tions urged by the parties, we have concluded that the trial court’s decision must be affirmed as a reasonable one.

The last will of Charles A. Canfield, as we have said, was executed in 1912. By the terms of this will the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.