THE ORPHAN’S SHARE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLIV, Issue 9876, 25 July 1923, Page 8

THE ORPHAN’S SHARE

A WILL CASE AT COURT. JUDGE'S RULING WANTED. CHRISTCHURCH, This Day. His Honor Mr Justice Reed held a sitting of the Supreme Court in banco yesterday. . _ ‘ The New Zealand Insurance Company. as executor and trustee <?f the will of the late Flora Augusta Acton, widow, Christchurch, applied ioi a ruling as to whether Lorna Mim*l Acton, 14 years of age, an orphan, grandchild of the testatrix, was entitled to any interest' or estate, presumptive or otherwise*, in the proceeds of realisation of the testatrix s residuary estate. The died in September, 1918, leaving aw estate valued at £14,792. She prorated for legacies for her children, and fc& their sharing the residue of the pstatfA. She also provided that if any chfid of hers died in her lifetime, leaving wulflwßn, those childrens—her grandefijldreP—should share in the estate. There only one grandchild! affected by will, Lorna, daughter of Charles Acton, who died in WL3. The testatrix * children- received in legacies about £BOO each. Lorna- was- given a legacy >f £2OO. It was; claimed on her behalf that, in ’ addition to that small legacy, she was entitled* to the share in the- residuary estate Hi®? l father voyld have been entitled 1 , to rlf he had survived the testatrix. The defendants-* were- John Acton, rimaru,- returned soldier ; Harry Acton, Invercargill, farmer ;■ Edith* 1 tefeher, wife of Joshua Fletcher, CamkmuSge, Waikato; Walter’ Acton, A lien ton, Ashburton, farmer; Mary Hast How,, wtre □f William Hastilow, Wakefield; Aidson, farmer;: George Acton, Flewsamct Point, Timaru, farmer; Francis* Aetoa, Manly, Sydney, farmer; Lucy MRDougall, wife of Charles St. McEfcugaffl, Nelson, farmer; Annie McCaskill, wife of Donald McCaskill, Hokitika, saftori inspector; children of the testatrix r and George Harper, Christchurch,, solicitor, guardian ad' litem of! Lo»na< M. Acton. .. ... .. Mr W. J. Sim appeared for- tlie> insurance company, as plaintiff, Mr M. J. Gresson for Walter Acton; who-naa been served on behalf of all defendants except Lorna, and Mr Harper for Lorna, as the principal' defendant. Mr Gresson said' that it was clear that the testatrix did' not intend’ that Lorna should take the share- lii the residuary estate that Lorna’s- father would have had if he survived. The testatrix left Lorna a legacy of' only £2OO, while she loft her children about £BOO each, showing that she differentiated between Lorna and the others. She may have been influenced by the fact that Lorna, since the death of her father in 1913, had lived with her linc-le, Walter Adand, at Ashburton. Judgment was reserved. His Honor said that he would' hear later an application by Mr Sim for an order empowering the trustees, in theevent of the Court deciding against Lorna’s claim for a share in the-residu-ary estate, to vary the investment of the £2OO legacy, which, under the will', was placed in the Post Office Savings Bank until Lorna was 21. Mr Sim said that it might be desirable to call on the capital in order’ tomeet expenses of Lorna’s education.