Craig's Adm'r v. Williams
Decision Date | 15 February 1918 |
Citation | 200 S.W. 481,179 Ky. 329 |
Parties | CRAIG'S ADM'R ET AL. v. WILLIAMS ET AL. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Gallatin County.
Suit by John P. Thomas, as administrator of the estate of William Craig, deceased, and others, for the construction of his will, against Anna S. Williams and others. From an order sustaining demurrer to the petition plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
Perry & Cammack, of Owenton, for appellants.
Scott & Hamilton, of Frankfort, Frank C. Greene, of Carrollton, and R. B. Brown, of Warsaw, for appellees.
Wm Craig, a resident of Gallatin county, died at his home in that county November 8, 1912, testate, and his will was shortly thereafter duly admitted to probate by the Gallatin county court. The person appointed executor by the will having declined to qualify, the appellant John P. Thomas, by an order of the Gallatin county court, was appointed administrator, with the will annexed, of Wm. Craig's estate, and duly qualified as such.
The will of the testator devised his estate to his children and grandchildren, but the only provisions of the instrument with which we are concerned will be found in the third clause thereof, which is as follows:
There is no mention elsewhere in the will of the property devised John W. Craig, nor does the name of the latter again appear in any other part of the will except in the sixth and last clause, which directs that the testator's "personal property consisting of cash, cash notes, goods, and merchandise and so forth," should be divided among his four children equally, John W. Craig being mentioned as one of them. This clause, however, is not here involved.
John W. Craig died October 20, 1915, intestate, and childless. Sarah A. Lilly, a daughter of the testator, Wm. Craig, and sister of John W. Craig, died in the spring of the year 1914, testate, leaving by her will the whole of her estate, real and personal, to her husband, James W. Lilly, who subsequently and, after the probating of the will, sold and by deed conveyed his supposed interest in the real estate left by the will of Wm. Craig to John W. Craig, to the appellants, Hattie Jane Thomas, Orville Craig, and Edith Bell Roberts, who are now claiming such alleged interest under their deed from James W. Lilly and under the wills of Sarah A. Lilly and Wm. Craig.
The administrator with the will annexed of Wm. Craig and certain of the devisees under the will of the latter brought this action in the court below against the other devisees and James W. Lilly and his vendees, to obtain a construction of Wm. Craig's will for the purpose of ascertaining what interest, if any, Hattie Jane Thomas, Orville Craig, and Edith Bell Roberts, the vendees of James W. Lilly, have in the property devised by the will of Wm. Craig to John W Craig. The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the petition upon the grounds: (1) That John W. Craig took under the will of his father, Wm. Craig, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Blair v. Commonwealth
...... indulged that his rights were prejudiced. Gillum v. Commonwealth, 121 S.W. 445; Williams v. Commonwealth, 140 Ky. 34, 130 S.W. 807. . . In. Taggart v. Commonwealth, ......
-
Roy v. West
......Cundall, 99 Ky. 202, 35 S.W. 546, 18. Ky. Law Rep. 116; Craig's Adm'r v. Williams,. 179 Ky. 329, 200 S.W. 481; the Vandyke Case, supra; and many. other cases referred to in each ......
-
Montgomery's ex'R v. Northcutt
...cases are White's Trustee v. White, 86 Ky. 602, 7 S.W. 26; Whallen v. Kellner, 104 S.W. 1018, 31 Ky. Law Rep. 1285; Craig's Adm'r v. Williams, 179 Ky. 329, 332, 200 S.W. 481; Froman v. Froman, 175 Ky. 536, 194 S.W. 809. It is also pointed out on the same page of the same volume that the lin......
-
Parepoint v. Parepoint's Adm'r
...... operate. "But," as stated in Reed, etc., v. Williams, etc., 194 Ky. 662, 240 S.W. 391, "this. rule is not a rule of property, but only one of ......