Abrams v. Templeton

Facts

In 1914, the testator Mary Ann Taylor Ramage executed her will in which she devised 130 acres of land to the Appellants. She also devised 160 acres to her husband Frank Ramage during his life, then to his children during their life and then to the Appellees. Frank had nine children and of these nine, only five had children.

Appellants sued Appellees, claiming that the gift Appellees received was void because it violated the Rule Against Perpetuities. The trial judge ruled that the gift did violate the Rule and that under state law, they must apply a savings clause that preserves the testator’s distribution intent but doesn’t violate the Rule.

The trial judge found that the testator wanted to equally benefit the Appellants and Appellees, but she intended for the 160 acres to stay with the Appellees. The trial judge, therefore, applied a savings clause to devise the interest amongst Frank Ramage’s children and the Appellees. However, the clause failed to vest the interest of Frank’s children who were childless. Appellants appealed this ruling, arguing that the gift was void and that they are entitled to the interest of Frank’s four children who were childless.