Extrinsic Evidence Allowed to Resolve Ambiguity in Address of Property Devised

It was reversible error for the Orphans’ Court to fail to consider extrinsic evidence to resolve a latent ambiguity in a will. The decedent had owned five parcels of real property, and had specifically devised one parcel to five of his seven children, but the residuary beneficiary had claimed that a gift of “293-241 Farragut Terrace” did not include the entire property that the decedent had owned and known as 293-243 Farragut Terrace (now known as Farragut Street) , so the property should be subdivided to create a property to be known as 243 Farragut Street to pass as part of the residue of the estate. The Orphans’ Court failed to consider the scheme of the will and the “natural intention of the testator,” because the evidence showed that there was no property with the address “239-241 Farragut Street” separate from any property known as “243 Farragut Street,” and the “239-241” in the will was “plainly the scrivener’s error.” The beneficiary was therefore entitled to sell the entire property consistent with 20 Pa.C.S. § 301(b), and the purchaser was entitled to specific performance of the agreement of sale. Estate of Walter Edmonds, Deceased, 204 PA Super 147, ___ A.3d ___ (7/16/2024).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.