Abernathy v. McCoy
Decision Date | 23 December 1926 |
Docket Number | Nos. 12223-12227.,s. 12223-12227. |
Citation | 91 Ind.App. 574,154 N.E. 682 |
Parties | ABERNATHY v. McCOY et al., and four other cases. |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court; Jere West, Judge.
Actions, consolidated for trial, by Isaac N. Abernathy, guardian of Matilda May Stevenson and others, minors, against Mary Esther McCoy, and husband, against William T. Morin and wife, against Fielden E. Morin and wife, against Martha M. McDill and another, and against the Tippecanoe Land Company, in which Gladys R. Davis was made a party plaintiff on the death of one of such minors. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed with instruction.Joseph B. Ross, of La Fayette, for appellant.
Miller, Dailey & Thompson, of Indianapolis, and Clyde H. Jones and Stuart, Simms & Stuart, all of La Fayette, for appellees.
One John Evans, a resident of Ohio, died testate in Ross county, Ohio, in 1842, the owner of several large tracts of land in Tippecanoe county, Ind. He executed his last will and testament on May 24, 1837, and a codicil thereto on September 25, 1838. After his death the said will, with the codicil thereto, was duly probated in the court of common pleas of said Ross county on January 11, 1842. Thereafter, by order of the Tippecanoe probate court, and upon due application in that behalf, a certified copy of said will was, on February 17, 1845, recorded in the record of wills of Tippecanoe county.
The said John Evans left surviving him, two daughters, Mary Ann G. Boggs and Minerva C. Evans, and also two grandsons, Edward O. Stevenson and Job E. Stevenson, children of a deceased daughter. The lands owned by said John Evans, in Indiana, at the time of his death, were disposed of under the tenth item of his will; said item, so far as the same is material to the consideration of this case, being as follows:
(Our italics.)
The testator also directed the executors thereof, whom he named and who duly qualified and acted as executors of said will, to partition said lands among the said devisees, and this was done in December, 1843; the lands set off to Job E. and William O. Stevenson, 1,440 acres, being set off to them in common. Thereafter, but prior to 1857, the said Mary Ann G. Boggs died, and the lands which, by said executors, had been set off to her under the will of John Evans, were, by the judgment and decree of the Tippecanoe circuit court, in an action for partition, partitioned and set off to Minerva C. Evans, one-half part, to Job E. Stevenson, one-fourth part for life, and to Edward O. Stevenson, Jr., son of Edward O. Stevenson, one-fourth part in fee simple.
In 1858 Edward O. Stevenson, Jr., commenced a suit in the Tippecanoe circuit court, wherein he asked that the lands which had been set off to his father and to Job E. Stevenson, by the said executors, and also the lands which had been set off to himself and to Job E. Stevenson in the partition suit of 1857 (the Boggs land), should be partitioned between the said parties, the plaintiff and Job E. Stevenson. Under a decree of said court one-half of said lands were set apart to said plaintiff in fee simple, and one-half part was set off to Job E. Stevenson “for his sole use and benefit during the term of his natural life.”
Minerva C. Evans died in 1875, leaving no child or children surviving her, and under a decree in a partition suit there was set off to said Job E. Stevenson, “for and during his natural life,” the one-fourth part of the lands lately then owned by said Minerva C. Evans. This decree was framed according to the provisions of the will of said John Evans, which declared that such lands should be held “upon the same terms and conditions” as the lands directly devised to said party. Job E. Stevenson was in possession of and occupying all of said lands so set off to him, and in October, 1893, he, his wife, and one Eva C. Stevenson, an only daughter, then of full age, executed a deed, in form a deed of warranty, conveying a portion of said lands (920 acres) to one John K. McMillan. Again, and later in the same year, the same parties executed another and similar deed to said McMillan, conveying to him additional lands, of those so held by said Job E. Stevenson as aforesaid.
Shortly after the above-mentioned deeds were executed, the wife of Job E. Stevenson died, and he remained a widower until September 22, 1903, when he was married to one Gladys Warnock. After this marriage he and his said wife lived together until in July, 1922, when Job Stevenson died, leaving surviving him Eva C. Stevenson aforenamed, and then the wife of one George W. Cable, and also three daughters, viz. Matilda May Stevenson, Minerva Colgate Stevenson, and Evelynn Stevenson, children born to himself and Gladys Warnock Stevenson, and all of them under legal age.
After the death of Job E. Stevenson, the appellant, Isaac N. Abernathy, was appointed as guardian of his said three minor daughters, and shortly thereafter, as such, commenced suits to recover for said wards a portion of said lands. Six actions were commenced in the Tippecanoe circuit court. Five of these-one against Mary E. McCoy and Moraine McCoy, her husband, No. 12223 on the docket of this court; another against William T. Morin and Jewel Morin, his wife, No. 12224; another against Fielden E. Morin and Alma Morin, his wife, No. 12225; another against Martha M. McDill and Mabel McDill Andrews, No. 12226; and the other against the Tippecanoe Land Company, No. 12227-were taken by change of venue to Montgomery. These said cases were, for the purpose of trial, consolidated in the Montgomery circuit court.
Pending the trial of said causes, said Minerva C. Stevenson, daughter of said Job E. Stevenson, died, and her mother, Gladys R. Davis, former widow of Job E. Stevenson, was then made a party, as being one of the heirs of her said daughter. From an adverse...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gray v. Gray
... ... There cannot be a merger of a ... life estate and a defeasible fee in remainder. 31 C.J.S., ... Estates, § 126; Abernathy v. McCoy, 91 Ind.App. 574, ... 154 N.E. 682. Compare Larmon v. Larmon, 173 Ky. 477, ... 191 S.W. 110. This conclusion is different from the ... ...
-
Gray v. Gray
...remainder. There cannot be a merger of a life estate and a defeasible fee in remainder. 31 C.J.S., Estates, Sec. 126; Abernathy v. McCoy, 91 Ind. App. 574, 154 N.E. 682. Compare Larmon v. Larmon, 173 Ky. 477, 191 S.W. 110. This conclusion is different from the construction of the will by th......
- Abernathy v. McCoy
-
Ross v. Thompson, 18743
...it may be said that it is tested by the same rules of law as is a request for a peremptory instruction to the jury. Abernathy v. McCoy, 1926, 91 Ind.App. 574, 600, Points 16-18, 154 N.E. 682. In Hill v. Rogers, 1951, 121 Ind.App. 708, 712, (Transfer denied) 99 N.E.2d 270, 272, it is said th......