Hall v. Elliott

7 Citing cases

  1. Green v. Nassif

    No. 0545 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Oct. 4, 2016)

    First, he points to 1993 ET § 9-103, which provided the general order of abatement and ademption for legacies, and provided for contribution: Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196 (1964), the leading Maryland case on equitable adjustment, does not specify the appropriate standard of review for this issue. We conclude that we review the legal analysis of the circuit court de novo, but we review the decision as to whether to grant the equitable adjustment for abuse of discretion.

  2. Monroney v. Mercantile-Safe Deposit & Trust Co.

    291 Md. 546 (Md. 1981)   Cited 5 times

    In the exercise of our discretion under Rule 882 a, costs shall be paid out of the three-fourths share of the Item 12 trust. Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196, 216, 202 A.2d 726, 737 (1964). Decree of the Circuit Court of Baltimore City reversed and case remanded to that court for the entry of a decree consistent with this opinion.

  3. Pellegrino v. Maryland National Bank

    291 A.2d 456 (Md. 1972)

    The whole matter was further clouded by the widow's right to renounce the provisions of the will and take instead her statutory share. Mr. Smith died in April of 1969, with the consequence that the administration of his estate was not controlled by Ch. 3, § 1 of the Laws of 1969, which substantially revised Maryland Code, Article 93, relating to the administration of the estates of decedents who died on and after 1 January 1970. Under the law applicable to Mr. Smith's estate, Code (1957, 1964 Repl. Vol.) Art. 93, § 329, his widow could, at any time within a period of seven months of the grant of letters, elect to renounce the provision made for her by his will, and elect to take instead her statutory share, which in this case would have been one-third of each of his assets in kind, including the stock of Smitty's Management, Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196, 202 A.2d 726 (1964). But see Code (1957, 1969 Repl. Vol.) Art. 93, § 3-208.

  4. Shamberger v. Dessel

    215 A.2d 177 (Md. 1965)   Cited 1 times

    " Similar definitions are found in 6 Page, Wills (3 ed.), p. 17, and in Sykes, Maryland Practice, § 83; also see Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196. A general legacy is one which is payable out of the general assets of the estate of the testator, being a bequest of money or other thing in quantity, and not separated or distinguished from others of the same kind.

  5. Wm. D. Shellady, Inc. v. Herlihy

    236 Md. 461 (Md. 1964)   Cited 13 times

    Gardner v. McNeal, 117 Md. 27, 35-37, 82 A. 988 (1911) and Gelbach v. Shively, 67 Md. 498, 10 A. 247 (1887). See also Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196, 202 A.2d 726 (1964). As Item 2 is written, the 104 shares of Class A stock which the testator owned would pass to the corporation as the testator's residuary legatee.

  6. Nassif v. Green

    198 Md. App. 719 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2011)   Cited 4 times

    Prior to 1969, a renouncing spouse had the right to take her share of estate assets in kind, although she did not get possession until distribution. Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196, 205, 202 A.2d 726 (1964). After 1969, Maryland Code (1957, 1969 Repl.Vol.), art. 93, §§ 3-102 and 101, a spouse's share of an intestate estate (assuming children) was one-third of the "net estate."

  7. Nassif v. Green

    No. 1175, September Term, 2009 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Feb. 2, 2011)

    Prior to 1969, a renouncing spouse had the right to take her share of estate assets in kind, although she did not get possession until distribution. Hall v. Elliott, 236 Md. 196, 205 (1964). After 1969, Maryland Code (1957, 1969 Repl. Vol.), art. 93, §§ 3-102 and 101, a spouse's share of an intestate estate (assuming children) was one-third of the "net estate.