ÿWPCï 3# ÚUNå %3 0(9w@a4¡µÄ 0lÌ 0D8Æ| 0JB 0TŒ 0^à 0h> 0r¦ 0| 0†” 0 1uª 0d AQƒ BÔ 0Dñ 0@5 0Du D/¹ Bè D3 U>8 B)v DCŸ AMâ U*/ Y H[û£v~žvÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ~  €  ‚£ƒ„…Ó€‘”n~<$(#(#3|x”((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ d(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d****7Border 1dd "+Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial øÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€-ÔÔ€-ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€-XÔÌÌò òMay€15,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€-ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó >Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appelleesðð€suit€was€brought€pursuant€to€the€provisions€of€T.C.A.€ðð€29„14„105,€whichÏstates€as€here€pertinent:ÌÌà8 àà àò òFiduciary€powers€and€duties.ó 󀄄€Any€person€interested€as€or€throughÏan€executor,€administrator,€trustee,€guardian,€or€other€fiduciary,€creditor,€devisee,Ïlegatee,€heir,€next€of€kin,€or€cestui€que€trust,€in€the€administration€of€a€trust,€or€ofÏthe€estate€of€a€decedent,€an€infant,€lunatic,€or€insolvent€may€have€a€declaration€ofÏrights€or€legal€relations€in€respect€thereto:ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà à(3)€To€determine€any€question€arising€in€the€administration€of€the€estate€orÏtrust,€including€questions€of€construction€of€wills€and€other€writings.Ì ñÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€record€establishes€that€Ms.€Marcum€died€subsequently.€€In€answering€the€appelleeððsÏcomplaint,€Georgetown€asserted€the€affirmative€defense€that€all€necessary€parties€were€not€beforeÏthe€court€inasmuch€as€Ms.€Marcumððs€estate€was€still€under€administration.€€It€was€asserted€that€Ms.ÏMarcum€and€Georgetown€were€the€only€potential€beneficiaries€under€the€will.€€Therefore,ÏGeorgetown€sought€to€join€the€co„executors€of€that€estate,€Don€Gordon€and€Phil€Gordon.€€AÏconsent€order€was€entered€to€include€the€co„executors€as€additional€parties.€€It€was€further€orderedÏthat€the€original€complaint€be€treated€as€having€been€joined€in€by€them.ÌPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñò ò›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€Ìà@ àAT€JACKSONó óÌÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌà à)Ìò òDON€E.€GORDON€and€PHIL€T.€ó óà à)à àWeakley€County€Chancery€CourtÌò òGORDON,€CO„ADMINISTRATORSó óà à)à àNo.€14869ÌÙ€ Ùò òœßR€,.+A1-j|Åùt` Å `€€@ÿRß›WITH€WILL€ANNEXED€OF€THEó óà à)Ìò òESTATE€OF€JAMES€W.€MARCUMó ó,à à)Ìò òDECEASED€and€DON€E.€GORDONó óà à)Ìò òand€PHIL€T.€GORDON,€ó óà à)Ìò òEXECUTORS€OF€THE€ESTATE€OFó óà à)Ìò òNELL€WRIGHT€MARCUM,ó óà à)Ìò òDECEASED,ó óà à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Plaintiffs/Appellees.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.A.€No.€02A01„9709„CH„00218Ìà à)Ìò òGEORGETOWN€UNIVERSITYó ó,à à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Weakley€County€at€Dresden.Ìò òHonorable€William€Michael€Maloan,€Chancelloró óÌÌÌÌò òLee€M.€Greeró ó,€GREER€&€GREER,€Paris,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellant.ÌÌÌò òH.€Max€Speightó ó,€Dresden,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiffs/Appellees.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÌà àò òFARMER,€J.ó óÌÌò òHIGHERS,€J.ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òLILLARD,€J.ó ó:€œ(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓ›œà àThis€is€a€will€construction€case.€€The€testator,€James€W.€Marcum,€died€June€22,Ï1995,€a€resident€of€Weakley€County.€€His€will,€executed€on€July€16,€1984,€was€admitted€toÏprobate€upon€his€death.€€This€appeal€stems€from€a€complaint× ƒ/ ××  ×€filed€by€the€appellees,€Don€E.ÏGordon€and€Phil€T.€Gordon,€co„administrators€with€will€annexed€of€the€estate€of€€James€Marcum,Ïin€the€chancery€court€seeking€a€declaratory€judgment€as€to€the€proper€interpretation€of€the€will€andÏthe€proper€disposition€of€the€decedentððs€estate.€€Specifically,€the€appellees€sought€a€determinationÏas€to€whether€the€appellant,€Georgetown€University€(Georgetown),€is€a€beneficiary€under€theÏwillððs€residuary€clause€or€whether,€as€they€believe,€the€decedent€died€partially€intestate€and€thatÏconsequently€his€mother,€Nell€Wright€Marcum,€his€only€heir€at€law€at€the€time€of€his€death,€is€theÏtrue€beneficiary.× ƒ0 ××  ×€€After€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€finding€that€the€bequest€toÏGeorgetown€was€contingent€upon€Ms.€Marcum€predeceasing€her€son€and,€since€she€did€not,€theÍgift€lapsed.€€Georgetown€has€appealed€from€this€decision.€€For€the€reasons€expressed€below,€weÏreverse.ÌÌà àThe€will€of€the€deceased€disposes€of€his€property€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àTHIRD:€All€real€property€wherever€situated,€which€I€mayÏown€at€the€time€of€my€death;€together€with€the€buildings€andÏstructures€thereon€and€all€rights€and€easements€appurtenant€thereto,€IÏgive€and€devise€to€my€mother,€NELL€WRIGHT€MARCUM,€if€sheÏsurvives€me.€€In€the€event€my€mother€does€not€survive€me,€I€herebyÏmake€the€following€direct€bequests,€all€to€be€made€in€loving€memoryÏof€my€late€mother,€NELL€WRIGHT€MARCUM:ÌÌà8 à€€*à8 à$10,000€to€the€Clearview€School€for€RetardedÏChildren,€Scarbrough,€New€York;ÌÌà8 à€€*à8 à$10,000€to€the€National€Council€for€the€Retarded,ÏWashington,€D.C.;€ÌÌà8 à€*à8 à$10,000€to€St.€Maryððs€Church,€Scarbrough,€NewÏYork;ÌÌà8 à€*à8 à$10,000€to€the€Sharon€Methodist€Church,€Sharon,ÏTennessee.ÌÌà8 à€*à8 àAfter€the€above€direct€bequests,€and€after€paying€allÏmy€estateððs€expenses,€I€give,€devise€and€bequeath€allÏthe€rest,€residue€and€remainder€of€my€property€andÏestate€to€Georgetown€University,€.€.€.€to€be€held€inÏTrust€by€the€aforesaid€University€for€the€Edmund€A.ÏWalsh€School€of€Foreign€Service.€€It€is€my€intentionÏthat€a€specific€Trust€be€established€in€my€nameÏbenefitting€said€school,€my€alma€mater.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.€€This€Trust€bequest€is€made€on€the€specific€conditionÏthat€said€Georgetown€University€guarantees€that€beginning€ninetyÏ(90)€days€after€my€death,€or€as€soon€thereafter€as€legally€possible,Ïand€each€ninety€(90)€days€thereafter,€that€said€Trust€shall€pay€$3,750Ïfrom€its€annual€income€to€my€father,€JAMES€O.€MARCUM,€ofÏShiloh€Road,€Corinth,€Mississippi.€€On€the€death€of€my€father,€theÏaforesaid€payment€to€him€or€his€estate€shall€immediately€terminate.€.Ï.€.€€In€the€event€the€aforesaid€School€of€Foreign€Service€is€unwillingÏto€accept€the€bequest€or€unable€or€unwilling€to€make€the€aforesaidÏquarterly€payments€of€$3,750€each,€then€I€give,€devise€and€bequeathÏmy€entire€residual€estate€to€WILBUR€ELLIS/CONNELL€BROS.ÏCOMPANY€PROFIT€SHARING€PLAN,€.€.€.€San€Francisco,ÏCalifornia.€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€parties€entered€into€the€following€stipulations:ÌÌÓÓà8 àThe€Decedent€was€a€single€man€who€had€no€issue.€€The€DecedentððsÏfather,€James€O.€Marcum€predeceased€the€Decedent.€€TheÏDecedentððs€mother,€Nell€Wright€Marcum,€survived€the€Decedent,Ïbut€has€since€died.€€Nell€Wright€Marcum€was€the€Decedentððs€soleÏintestate€heir.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€Decedent€was€a€resident€of€New€York€at€the€time€of€theÏexecution€of€his€Will.€€The€Decedentððs€Will€was€prepared€by€DonalÏM.€Walsh,€Jr.,€.€.€.€.€€Mr.€Walsh€was€personally€acquainted€with€theÏDecedent€before€the€preparation€of€the€Will.€€Mr.€Walsh€interviewedÏthe€Decedent€and€corresponded€with€the€Director€of€Planned€givingÏat€Georgetown€University€concerning€the€Decedent€before€the€WillÏwas€prepared.€€The€Decedent€was€an€alumnus€of€GeorgetownððsÏSchool€of€Foreign€Service.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€bequests€in€the€Decedentððs€Will€to€Clearview€School€forÏRetarded€Children,€National€Council€for€the€Retarded,€St.€MaryððsÏChurch€and€Sharon€Methodist€Church€were€all€contingent€on€theÏDecedentððs€mother€predeceasing€Decedent.€€The€Decedentððs€motherÏsurvived€the€Decedent,€and,€therefore,€these€bequests€failed.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€provision€in€Trust€for€Georgetown€University€alsoÏprovided€a€lifetime€income€interest€in€50%€of€the€Trust€for€theÏDecedentððs€father€James€O.€Marcum.€€Since€James€O.€MarcumÏpredeceased€the€Decedent,€the€interest€of€James€O.€Marcum€lapsed€.Ï.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€Decedentððs€gross€estate€for€Federal€Estate€tax€purposesÏas€originally€filed€was€$797,941.71.€€Of€this€amount,€those€assetsÏpassing€to€Nell€were:€real€estate€devised€to€Nell€valued€at€$475,000;Ïa€jointly€owned€bank€account€and€a€jointly€owned€mutual€fundÏwhich€went€to€Nell€by€right€of€survivorship€valued€at€$50,302.12;Ïand€an€IRA€which€went€to€Nell€as€death€payee€valued€atÏ$100,404.89.€€Based€upon€gross€estate€valuations,€the€assetsÏpassing€to€Nell€by€virtue€of€the€Decedentððs€death€totaledÏ$625,707.01.€€Based€upon€gross€estate€valuations,€the€remainder€ofÏthe€estate,€which€is€the€portion€in€dispute€in€this€cause,€totaledÏ$172,234.80,€less€allowable€expenses,€taxes€and€€deductions€thatÏmay€be€properly€chargeable€to€such€funds.€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àAfter€consideration€of€the€foregoing€stipulations,€the€deposition€of€Mr.€Walsh,€theÏbriefs€and€arguments€of€counsel,€the€trial€court€held€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€issue€is€whether€the€residuary€gift€to€Georgetown€isÍconditional€on€Nell€Marcum€predeceasing€the€testator.€€If€the€gift€isÏconditional,€the€testator€would€die€intestate€as€to€his€residuary€estate.ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€Court€finds€the€Last€Will€and€Testament€of€James€W.ÏMarcum€is€sufficiently€clear€and€unambiguous.€€The€residuary€gift€toÏGeorgetown€University€would€only€take€effect€ð ðin€the€event€myÏmother€does€not€survive€me.ðð€€As€Nell€Wright€Marcum€survived€herÏson,€the€gift€to€Georgetown€University€fails.€€The€residuary€clauseÏclearly€states:€ð ðAfter€the€above€direct€bequests,€and€after€paying€allÏmy€estate€expenses,€I€give,€devise€and€bequeath€all€the€rest,€residueÏand€remainder€of€my€property€and€estate€to€Georgetown€University€.Ï.€.€.ðð€€The€direct€bequests€are€only€to€take€effect€if€his€motherÏpredeceased€him€and€are€made€ð ðin€loving€memory€of€my€lateÏmother.ðð€€Any€other€construction€could€be€in€violation€of€the€clearÏlanguage€of€the€will.ÌÌà8 àà àTherefore,€it€is€the€judgment€of€the€Court€that€the€bequest€toÏthe€defendant,€Georgetown€University,€was€contingent€on€NellÏWright€Marcum€predeceasing€her€son,€James€W.€Marcum,€and€sinceÏNell€Wright€Marcum€survived€her€son,€the€gift€lapsed.€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€sole€issue€on€appeal€as€stated€by€the€appellant€is€whether€ð ðthe€trial€court€err[ed]Ïin€holding€that€the€decedent€intended€the€residuary€bequest€to€Georgetown€to€take€effect€only€if€theÏdecedentððs€mother€(Nell)€predeceased€the€decedent,€resulting€in€a€partial€intestacy.ðð€€GeorgetownÏargues€that€a€reading€of€the€will€as€a€whole€clearly€evidences€the€decedentððs€intent€that€GeorgetownÏreceive€his€entire€residuary€estate,€in€all€events.€€It€is€contended€that€any€other€reading€would€renderÏa€partial€intestacy€as€to€the€residuary€estate,€a€result€highly€disfavored€under€Tennessee€law.€ÏGeorgetown€contends€that€the€decedentððs€mother€only€received€all€of€his€real€property.€€It€isÏasserted€that€the€bequest€to€Georgetown€was€not€simply€another€charitable€bequest€but€a€clearÏexpression€of€how€the€testator€intended€to€dispose€of€the€remainder€of€his€estate€once€the€directÏbequests€(either€to€his€mother€or€the€other€four€charities)€were€made.€€Georgetown€points€to€theÏfact€that€under€the€appelleesðð€interpretation€of€the€will€the€decedent€intended€to€make€no€provisionÏfor€his€father€in€the€event€his€mother€survived€him.€€Georgetown€argues€that€certainly€the€decedentÏwould€have€wanted€to€provide€for€his€father,€which€was€done€under€the€residuary€clause,€even€ifÏhis€mother€predeceased€him.€€Georgetown€points€to€the€fact€that€the€bequest€to€it€has€no€languageÏconditioning€it€on€the€decedentððs€motherððs€prior€death.€€Georgetown€questions€that€if€the€decedentÍintended€his€mother€to€receive€his€entire€estate€if€she€survived€him,€then€why€not€merely€state€suchÏand€why€the€specific€mention€of€real€estate€to€her.€€It€is€further€asserted€that€since€the€will€wasÏprofessionally€drawn,€it€obviously€has€a€residuary€clause€operating€in€favor€of€Georgetown.€€If€theÏresiduary€clause€has€no€effect,€then€the€willððs€drafting€would€almost€certainly€constituteÏmalpractice.€€Finally,€Georgetown€contends€that€the€interpretation€suggested€by€the€appellees€isÏstrained€and€hinges€solely€upon€the€phrase€ð ðafter€the€above€direct€bequestsðð€which€is€merelyÏsuperfluous€and€heavily€outweighed€by€the€presumption€against€intestacy€and€the€surroundingÏcircumstances.ÌÌà àConversely,€the€appellees€assert€that,€since€the€decedentððs€mother€survived€him,€theÏresiduary€clause€containing€the€bequest€to€Georgetown€does€not€come€into€play€because€it€is€begunÏwith€the€words€ð ðafter€the€above€direct€bequests,ðð€which€were€to€be€made€only€if€the€decedentððsÏmother€predeceased€him.€€Appellees€contend€that€the€bequest€to€Georgetown€was€a€conditionalÏbequest€not€unlike€the€four€conditional€bequests€immediately€preceding€it€under€the€terms€of€theÏwill€and€that€since€the€decedentððs€mother€did€not€predecease€him,€the€bequest€to€Georgetown€failsÏas€do€the€other€four€charitable€bequests.€€Appellees€assert€that€consequently€the€decedent€diedÏpartially€intestate€and€that€his€mother,€as€his€sole€intestate€heir,€was€entitled€to€his€personal€propertyÏas€well.€€The€appellees€assert€that€James€Marcum€intended€his€mother€to€be€his€sole€beneficiaryÏunless€she€predeceased€him.€€They€note€that€if€the€decedent€died€partially€intestate,€his€mother€wasÏstill€his€exclusive€heir€under€the€intestate€laws.€ÌÌà àOur€review€of€the€trial€courtððs€decision€is€òòò òde€novoóóó ó€with€no€presumption€ofÏcorrectness.€€òòò òBurchfiel€v.€First€United€Methodist€Churchóóó ó,€933€S.W.2d€481,€483€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1996);€Rule€13(d)€T.R.A.P.€€The€cardinal€rule€in€the€construction€of€wills€is€to€ascertain€theÏintent€of€the€testator.€€òòò òGoodwin€v.€Naveóóó ó,€912€S.W.2d€719,€721€(Tenn.€App.€1995).€€In€doingÏso€it€is€necessary€to€look€to€the€entire€will€and€determine€the€testatorððs€intention€from€what€he€hasÏwritten€and€not€from€what€it€is€supposed€he€intended.€€òòò òPresley€v.€Hanksóóó ó,€782€S.W.2d€482,€488Í(Tenn.€App.€1989).€€Every€word€used€by€the€testator€is€presumed€to€have€some€meaning.€Ïòòò òDaugherty€v.€Daughertyóóó ó,€784€S.W.2d€650,€653€(Tenn.€1990).€€Parol€evidence€is€generallyÏinadmissible€to€add€to,€vary€or€contradict€language€used€in€the€will,€although€it€is€admissible€toÏexplain€a€latent€ambiguity.€€òòò òStickley€v.€Carmichaelóóó ó,€850€S.W.2d€127,€132€(Tenn.€1992).€Ïð ð[E]xtrinsic€evidence€of€the€condition,€situation€and€surroundings€of€the€testator€himself€may€beÏconsidered€only€as€aids€in€the€interpretation€of€the€language€used€by€the€testator,€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòò òIn€reÏWalkeróóó ó,€849€S.W.2d€766,€768€(Tenn.€1993)(quoting€òòò òNichols€v.€Toddóóó ó,€101€S.W.2d€486,€490Ï(Tenn.€App.€1936)).€€ÌÌà àAppellant€correctly€cites€the€general€rule€in€this€state€disfavoring€intestacy€whereÏone€has€undertaken€to€make€a€will.€€As€held€by€our€state€supreme€court€in€òòò òLedbetter€v.ÏLedbetteróóó ó,€216€S.W.2d€718,€720€(Tenn.€1949),€ð ð[t]he€law€presumes€that€one€who€undertakes€toÏmake€a€will€does€not€intend€to€die€intestate;€ððand€the€courts€will€place€such€a€construction€upon€theÏinstrument€as€to€embrace€all€the€testatorððs€property,€if€the€words€used,€by€any€fair€interpretation€orÏallowable€implication€will€embrace€it.ðð€ðð€òòò òLedbetteróóó ó,€216€S.W.2d€at€720€(quoting€òòò òPritchard€onÏWillsóóó ó,€ðð€386)).€We€hold€that€the€decedentððs€will€may€be€fairly€construed€so€as€to€avoid€a€partialÏintestacy€and€therefore€conclude€that€the€testator€intended€the€bequest€to€Georgetown€to€beÏunconditional€and€not€dependant€upon€whether€his€mother€predeceased€him.€€ÌÌà àWe€reach€this€determination€based€upon€the€following:€we€first€note,€as€theÏappellant€points€out,€that€the€four€direct€bequests€comprised€of€$10,000€each€are€all€separated€byÏsemi„colons€with€exception€of€the€last€which€ends€with€a€period.€€The€next€bequest,€which€is€toÏGeorgetown,€is€not€preceded€by€a€semi„colon€and€addresses€the€residuary€of€the€testatorððs€estate.€Ïòòò òBlackððs€Law€Dictionaryóóó ó€defines€a€residuary€clause€as€that€ð ð[c]lause€in€will€by€which€that€partÏof€property€is€disposed€of€which€remains€after€satisfying€bequests€and€devises.€€Any€part€of€theÏwill€which€disposes€of€property€not€expressly€disposed€of€by€other€provisions€of€the€will.ðð€ÏIncluded€within€the€residuary€clause€is€the€provision€pertaining€to€the€testatorððs€father,€indicating€aÍclear€intent€that€his€father€be€taken€care€of€from€the€funds€designated€to€Georgetown.€€If€the€will€isÏto€be€construed€as€suggested€by€the€appellees,€then€the€testator€died€partially€intestate€with€hisÏentire€estate€going€to€his€mother€and€absolutely€no€provision€for€his€father.€€Mr.€Walsh,€the€drafterÏof€the€will,€stated€in€his€deposition€that€the€decedent€ð ðwas€far€more€concerned€about€providing€forÏhis€father€than€he€was€for€his€mother€with€the€exception€of€making€sure€his€mother€had€the€house.ðð€€ÌÌà àMr.€Walsh€also€testified€that€the€testator€maintained€a€joint€checking€account€withÏhis€mother€and€that€his€mother€was€the€beneficiary€of€certain€life€insurance€he€held€through€hisÏemployer.€€It€was€Mr.€Walshððs€understanding€that,€when€he€and€the€decedent€discussed€the€latterððsÏestate,€the€testatorððs€real€estate€was€comprised€of€his€home€on€Albany€Post€Road€where€his€motherÏalso€resided.€€He€further€stated€that€the€value€of€the€home,€less€the€mortgage,€was€ð ðprobablyððÏ$40,000.ÌÌà àBased€upon€the€foregoing,€we€conclude€that€the€testator€intended€his€mother€toÏreceive€all€his€real€property€if€she€did€not€predecease€him€and€if€she€did,€the€four€direct€bequests,Ïtotalling€$40,000,€were€to€be€made€in€her€memory.€€In€addition,€the€testator€intended€GeorgetownÏas€a€beneficiary€under€his€will€in€all€events.€€Any€other€interpretation€would€render€the€residuaryÏclause€inoperative.€€We€do€not€believe€the€testator€intended€the€residuary€clause€of€his€will€to€takeÏeffect€only€on€the€condition€that€his€mother€survived€him.€€Moreover,€we€do€not€believe€the€testatorÏintended€that€provision€be€made€for€his€father€only€in€the€event€that€his€mother€predeceased€him.€ÏWe€further€find€merit€in€the€appellantððs€argument€that,€if€the€testator€intended€his€mother€to€€acquireÏhis€entire€estate€if€she€survived€him,€then€the€testator€could€have€simply€stated€so.€€Instead,€theÏtestator€chose€to€distinguish€between€his€real€property€and€personalty€which€we€find€significant.ÌÌà àIt€results€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed€and€this€cause€remandedÏthereto€for€further€proceedings.€€Costs€are€assessed€against€the€appellees,€for€which€execution€mayÏissue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌHIGHERS,€J.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌLILLARD,€J.€(Concurs)›