Anderson v. Conklin

• Decision Date: 22 October 1940
• Docket Number: 45391.
• Citation: 294 N.W. 339,229 Iowa 232
• Parties: ANDERSON v. CONKLIN et ux.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

294 N.W. 339

229 Iowa 232

ANDERSON v. CONKLIN et ux.

No. 45391.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

October 22, 1940

Appeal from District Court, Washington County; P. J. Siegers, Judge.

A suit to quiet title to real estate devised under the will of Jacob F. Anderson, deceased. Plaintiff appeals from decree awarding him an undivided five-sixths interest and defendant, Rollo Conklin, an undivided one-sixth interest in the real estate.

Affirmed.

Ralph H. Munro, of Fairfield, for appellant.

F. M Beatty, of Sigourney, for appellees.

STIGER, Justice.

This litigation arises out of paragraph six of the will, which reads: " To my son Sanford A. Anderson, I devise, give and bequeath the use, produce and income during the term of his life of my Real Estate described as follows: (Description of 120 acres). Subject to this proviso that my wife Harriett Anderson shall have the use, produce and income during the term of her life of the following described 40 acres (Describing 40 acres of the 120 acres). And at the death of the above named Sanford A. Anderson the 120 acres above described shall descend to his heirs, absolutely and in fee simple."

The will was admitted to probate in 1901. Harriett Anderson, a life tenant, died in 1911. Sanford Anderson, a life tenant had three children Grace, Margaret and plaintiff, Jacob A Anderson. Grace married defendant, Rollo Conklin, in 1907 and died intestate without issue in 1909. Sanford Anderson died in 1939, survived by two of his children, Margaret Anderson Bower and the plaintiff, Jacob A. Anderson. Mrs. Bower conveyed all of her interest in the real estate to plaintiff.

Defendant, Rollo Conklin, claims that his wife, Grace Anderson Conklin, received a vested remainder in one-third of the real estate under the will of decedent and, as her surviving spouse, is entitled to one-half thereof or a one-sixth interest in the real estate.

For a defense to the suit, defendants pleaded: (1) That Grace Anderson Conklin at the time of her death was the owner of an undivided one-third interest in the real estate under the will of decedent subject to the life estate of her father, Sanford A. Anderson, who is now deceased; that Mrs. Conklin died intestate and without issue and that defendant, Rollo Conklin, as her surviving spouse, owns an undivided one-sixth interest in the real estate. (2) In a prior adjudication in a suit to construe the will brought by the life tenant, Harriett Anderson, it was decreed that Grace Anderson was devised a vested remainder in one-third of the real estate subject to the life estate of her father.

A decree was entered sustaining defendant's plea of prior adjudication.

The will was admitted to probate in July, 1901. In September, 1901, Harriett Anderson, surviving wife of decedent, and life tenant, brought a suit in equity for construction of the will. Sanford Anderson, life tenant, and his three children, Grace, Margaret and Jacob Anderson (plaintiff herein), and others, were made parties defendant. The petition alleged plaintiff and defendants were unable to agree as to the meaning, intention and legal effect of the will; that defendants claimed (a) the will was obscure and ambiguous and it was impossible for them to determine its meaning and the testator's intention; (b) that it violated section 2901, 1897 Code, which prohibits perpetuities; (c) that the rule in Shelley's Case applied under which will Sanford Anderson received a fee simple title and (d) that the will devised a fee simple title to Sanford Anderson and heirs of Sanford Anderson. Plaintiff then proceeded to deny the contentions of defendants and alleged the will was neither obscure nor ambiguous and clearly revealed the testator's intention to devise life estates to plaintiff and Sanford Anderson and at the death of Sanford Anderson the real estate descended to his children, the defendants (Grace, Margaret and Jacob Anderson), and other heirs of his body who may come within the scope of the provisions of said will, absolutely and by title in fee simple. The petition does not purport to definitely allege the interest the children of Sanford Anderson received under the will, that is, whether they received a vested or contingent remainder.

In September, 1901, a decree was entered in the case. It found that the will was plain and unambiguous; that plaintiff, Harriett Anderson, had a life estate in the property, and, " at the death of Sanford A. Anderson, the real estate described last above, descends to his children, the defendants, Grace V. Anderson, Margaret E. Anderson and Jacob A. Anderson, and other heirs of his body who may come within the scope of the provisions of said will, absolutely and by title-in-fee-simple; " etc. After then construing other provisions of the will not material to this case, the decree stated with reference to the real estate involved herein that subject to the life estates " the title of said real estate is in the children and heirs of the said Sanford A. Anderson."

I.

Plaintiff, appellant, contends that the court was without jurisdiction to construe the will of Jacob F. Anderson because its language is plain and unambiguous and not open to doubt. To sustain this contention, appellant cites the case of Anderson v. Meier, 227 Iowa 38, 287 N.W. 250, 252.In the Anderson case, the testator provided (1) for the payment of debts and funeral expenses; (2) devised and bequeathed to his wife all of his property and (3) appointed his wife executrix. A suit was brought in equity to construe the will. The trial court sustained a motion to dismiss. In affirming the lower court, Justice Hale states 227 Iowa loc. cit. 41, 287 N.W. loc. cit. 251: " The right of a court, whether equity or probate, to entertain an action solely for the construction of a will applies only to such actions as pertain to wills where the meaning is uncertain in its terms-ambiguous. The wording of Dr. Schroeder's will admits of but one meaning, and is expressed in such terms as to be clear and certain to any person."

In the instant case, the will states " and at the death of the above-named Sanford Anderson the 120 acres above described shall descend to his heirs absolutely and in fee simple."

...