## Facts

- Wesley S. Campbell died October 4, 1935, leaving a will with a residuary clause devising the residue to the “four chair officers” of San Diego Lodge No. 168, B.P.O.E., specifically the officers “in office at the time of distribution of my estate.”
- The will stated the officers would take “free of any trust,” while expressing an expectation they would use the property for charitable purposes consistent with lodge policies, and included a request that a friend (May Skinner) be assisted if needed.
- The lodge’s four chair officers were elected annually for one-year terms.
- The persons holding the offices at the time of the distribution hearing were different from those holding the offices at Campbell’s death.
- During probate, objections were filed asserting the residuary clause was void because identifying the takers at “time of distribution” could delay vesting beyond the period permitted by California’s rule against perpetuities and Civil Code limits on suspension of alienation.

## Issues

1. Whether a residuary devise to the lodge’s “four chair officers … in office at the time of distribution” created a future interest void at creation because it could, by any possibility, vest later than twenty-five years after the testator’s death under California Civil Code §§ 715–716 and the state constitutional rule against perpetuities.
2. If the residuary clause was void, whether the residue must be distributed to the decedent’s heirs at law as intestate property.

## Decision

- The probate court ruled the residuary clause invalid as violating Civil Code §§ 715–716 and the constitutional rule against perpetuities, and ordered the residue distributed to the heirs at law.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed.
- The court held the clause was void because the identity of the beneficiaries was fixed at “time of distribution,” and distribution could, by any possibility, occur more than twenty-five years after death.
- Because the residuary clause failed, the decedent was intestate as to the residue, which passed to the heirs at law.

## Legal Principles

- Under Civil Code § 716, a future interest is void in its creation if, by any possibility, it may suspend the absolute power of alienation longer than the period allowed by statute.
- For testamentary dispositions, the relevant measuring point for permissible suspension is the testator’s death.
- A gift keyed to the identity of officeholders “at the time of distribution” is contingent until distribution, and is invalid if distribution might possibly occur outside the permitted vesting period.
- Constructional preferences for early vesting cannot be used to alter clear testamentary language specifying vesting at distribution.

## Conclusion

A residuary gift to organizational officers “in office at the time of distribution” was void for remoteness because distribution could possibly be delayed beyond the statutory period; the residue therefore passed by intestacy to the decedent’s heirs at law.


In re Campbell’s Estate, 28 Cal. App. 2d 102, 82 P.2d 22 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)