Anderson v. Meier

• Decision Date: 01 August 1939
• Docket Number: 44772.
• Citation: 287 N.W. 250,227 Iowa 38
• Parties: ANDERSON et al. v. MEIER et al.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

287 N.W. 250

227 Iowa 38

ANDERSON et al. v. MEIER et al.

No. 44772.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

August 1, 1939

As Modified on Denial of Rehearing Nov. 24, 1939.

Appeal from District Court, Scott County; William W. Scott, Judge.

Action in equity to construe and determine rights under wills. The court dismissed the petition and plaintiffs appeal. The opinion states the facts.

Affirmed.

Eagleton & Eagleton, of Peoria, Ill., and Charles E Wittenmeyer, of Davenport, for appellants.

Chamberlin & Chamberlin and Hoersch & Hoersch, all of Davenport, for appellees.

HALE Justice.

On January 19, 1937, Dr. Peter H. Schroeder of Davenport died testate, naming in his will as sole devisee and legatee his wife Elsie Haak Schroeder, and appointing her as executrix. This will was executed February 25, 1925. However, two days before his death, on January 17, 1937, the said Elsie Haak Schroeder died. She also left a will, by the terms of which certain legacies of specific personal property were bequeathed by clause 1; and by clause 2 it was directed that the remainder of her estate, including after-acquired property, should be divided into six equal shares, three of which were bequeathed and devised to her husband, Peter H Schroeder, in lieu of dower and other statutory rights. Other shares were bequeathed and devised to her sisters, Minnie H. Meier, Thekla H. Hetzel, and Edna H. Compton. In her will she named as executor her husband. It appears that both wills were admitted to probate.

After the lapse of one year, and on February 18, 1938, the plaintiffs, who are all and the only heirs of Peter H. Schroeder, instituted this action against the defendants, who are the heirs of Elsie Haak Schroeder, setting out the facts above stated, together with details of the history and relations of Peter H. Schroeder and his wife with their various relatives, and asking that the court construe and interpret the provisions and intent of the will of Peter H. Schroeder, and determine the rights and interests of plaintiffs and defendants under the wills of said Peter H. Schroeder and his wife. The petition claims that the will of Peter H. Schroeder manifests the intention to provide only for the disposition of his own personal estate and not to devise to his wife any property which he might receive from the estate of his said wife; and claims that his estate and his share of the estate of Elsie Haak Schroeder would descend to plaintiffs as heirs of Peter H. Schroeder. Division 3 of plaintiffs' petition alleges that Elsie Haak Schroeder and her heirs have failed to file an election to take or not to take under the will of Peter H. Schroeder, and claims that the plaintiffs are entitled to the interest given by statute, and that plaintiffs, as heirs-at-law, of Peter H. Schroeder, are entitled to at least the share given by statute in the estate of Elsie Haak Schroeder. Division 4 claims certain funds amounting to $214 derived from the membership of Peter H. Schroeder in the Scott County Teachers' Association Mutual Benefit Group.

To this petition a motion to dismiss was filed, which was sustained on June 20, 1938, and plaintiffs, by the ruling on the motion, were given fifteen days to plead over or elect to stand on the petition. Thereafter on July 5, 1938, plaintiffs amended by changing the claim as it stood in the original petition from $7500 and half of the remainder to one-third, as hereinbefore stated. On July 6, 1938, a motion to dismiss the petition as amended was filed, containing in substance the grounds of the former motion, with some additions, and being as follows:

" 1. That the facts alleged in said Petition and Amendment do not entitle the Plaintiffs to the relief demanded. 2. That the Plaintiffs had adequate remedy at law in the probate court during the year of redemption." (Apparently error in writing " redemption" for " administration" .)

Grounds 3 and 4 refer to the statute of limitations and laches; ground 5 to the statutory rule as to non-lapsing of devises and legacies; ground 6 states that this action is in effect an attempt to set aside the wills and should be by ordinary proceedings; and ground 7 that the admission to probate is conclusive as to due execution.

Ground 8 is as follows: " That there is no ambiguity in the Wills in question and no evidence can be taken in regard to the action because the Statutes of Iowa are conclusive and exclude any hearing on the matter."

On July 11, 1938, this motion to dismiss was sustained and plaintiffs elected to stand on their pleadings, whereupon there was a final ruling on the motion to dismiss, and judgment for costs.

From such action of the court this appeal is prosecuted.

From the arguments we gather that both estates consisted entirely of personal property. Under the claim made in the petition Elsie Haak Schroeder, dying on January 17, 1937, left to her husband, Dr. Schroeder, one-third of her property; and this is all that is claimed from her estate by the heirs of Dr Schroeder (the plaintiffs), for the reason that there was no election on his part to take under the will of his wife. Therefore, plaintiffs claim that at the date of the husband's death, January 19, 1937, he was the owner of all his own property and one-third of his wife's estate, subject to costs and debts, and that the defendants would be entitled to two-thirds of the property of Elsie Haak Schroeder. This would leave for disposition the property of the husband, augmented by his...