Chadwick v. Chadwick
Decision Date | 02 February 1887 |
Citation | 6 Mont. 566 |
Parties | CHADWICK and others v. CHADWICK. |
Court | Montana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Third district, Lewis and Clarke county.
Petition in probate court for the decision of certain questions arising under the will of W. F. Chadwick. Judgment for petitioners. Defendants appealed.
Hedges & Miller, for appellants.
J. C. Robinson, for respondent.
In this record there are two appeals, each from an order affirming the action and judgment of the probate court of Lewis and Clarke county, each of which was rendered upon an agreed statement of facts. These appeals, in our view of the case, may be determined together.
The first of the agreed statements was as follows, viz.: “The petition of Norma D. Chadwick, widow of the said Walter F. Chadwick, deceased, having been filed in said court in the above entitled proceedings, on the twenty sixth day of January, 1886, for a decree setting apart a homestead, upon which a decree was made by the said court on the ninth day of April, 1886, granting the prayer of said petition; and it being claimed by and on the part of said Norma D. Chadwick that she is entitled to the homestead so set apart to her in addition to the devise to her in the will of said Walter F. Chadwick contained; and it being claimed by and on the part of the other devises mentioned in said will that Norma D. Chadwick, having elected to take under the will, that said homestead, if allowed, should be charged to and made a part of the devise to her in said will contained, on the final distribution of said estate: Now, therefore, it is hereby stipulated and agreed, by and on the part of the several parties interested herein, by their respective attorneys, *** that on all the record papers and proceedings heretofore had in reference to the estate of Walter F. Chadwick, deceased, and upon the foregoing facts and statements, said controversy be, and the same is hereby submitted to the said probate court for its determination upon an argument, at a date to be fixed by the court.”
The questions submitted are as follows, viz.: “Whether the said Norma D. Chadwick is entitled to said homestead, and, if so, shall it be in addition to the devise to her in said will contained; or whether said devise to her shall be charged with the said homestead, or the appraised value thereof; all parties hereto waiving any irregularity or failure to appeal from any order made herein relative to the setting apart of said homestead, and all parties reserving the right to appeal from the decision of the said court upon the questions hereby submitted.”
The second stipulation and statement of facts was as follows, viz.: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Clark v. Carolina Homes, Inc.
... ... control of their property; the allotment of dower, and other ... powers pertaining to this subject. Chadwick v ... Chadwick, 6 Mont. 566, 13 P. 385. In North Carolina ... partition is included in probate powers under this rule, as ... well as by ... ...
-
Vincent's Estate, In re
...of an estate of a deceased person is neither an action at law nor a suit in equity but it is a special proceeding.' See Chadwick v. Chadwick, 6 Mont. 566, 579, 13 P. 385. In State ex rel. Bartlett v. Second Judicial District Court, 18 Mont. 481, 484, 46 P. 259, 260, the court stated: 'It ha......
-
In re Estate of Cooney
...Bullerdick v. Hermsmeyer , 32 Mont. 541, 552, 81 P. 334, 337 (1905) ; see Reid , 126 Mont. at 531, 256 P.2d at 549; Chadwick v. Chadwick , 6 Mont. 566, 13 P. 385 (1887). ¶8 Montana law is clear that "a person may make a valid contract to dispose of his property by will." Lazetich v. Miller ......
-
In re Stinger's Estate
...of Montana cases are cited, but each one of them may be distinguished from the case under consideration. In the case of Chadwick v. Chadwick, 6 Mont. 566, 13 P. 385, action was brought in the probate court for construction of a will. This proceeding was brought independently of any other pr......