From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Noreen v. Sparks

United States District Court, D. Columbia
May 14, 1952
104 F. Supp. 675 (D.D.C. 1952)

Opinion

Civ. No. 2687-50.

May 14, 1952.

Catherine McCloskey, Olive B. Lacy, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.

Frank L. Peckham, Washington, D.C., for defendants.

John E. Larson (of McKenney, Flannery Craighill), Washington, D.C., for intervening defendant.


On motion for rehearing.

For opinion see 103 F. Supp. 588.


Upon motion of plaintiffs for rehearing and modification of memorandum opinion, and opposition of defendants thereto, said motion is denied.

Upon motion of the intervening defendant, Mercantile Trust Company of Baltimore, for reconsideration, and opposition of defendants thereto, I am still of the view that the testatrix intended that the Potts half of the trust property, in the event of Cornelia Ross Potts' death without leaving any child or children, should vest in descendants of Amelia Hadel, then living, and not in strangers to her blood who might have been devisees or grantees of such descendants of Amelia Hadel, in whom the Hadel half of the trust property had previously vested. The motion for reconsideration is denied.


Summaries of

Noreen v. Sparks

United States District Court, D. Columbia
May 14, 1952
104 F. Supp. 675 (D.D.C. 1952)
Case details for

Noreen v. Sparks

Case Details

Full title:NOREEN et al., plaintiffs, v. SPARKS et al., defendants, and Mercantile…

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: May 14, 1952

Citations

104 F. Supp. 675 (D.D.C. 1952)