Clark's Estate, In re, 54119
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Iowa |
| Citation | 181 N.W.2d 138 |
| Docket Number | No. 54119,54119 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the ESTATE of Homer D. CLARK, Deceased. Inez E. CLARK, Lloyd W. Clark, Melvine L. Clark and Glenn D. Clark, Appellants, v. Hugh W. LUNDY, as Executor of the Estate of Homer D. Clark, Deceased, and Kenneth H. Clark, Appellees. |
| Decision Date | 10 November 1970 |
Page 138
Inez E. CLARK, Lloyd W. Clark, Melvine L. Clark and Glenn D. Clark, Appellants,
v.
Hugh W. LUNDY, as Executor of the Estate of Homer D. Clark, Deceased, and Kenneth H. Clark, Appellees.
Page 139
Alfred M. Pabst, Albia, for appellants.
H. S. Life, Oskaloosa, for appellees.
REES, Justice.
Appeal from order of trial court extending time of performance of a family settlement agreement in the form of a stipulation previously acquiesced in by all parties. Plaintiffs contend the entry of such order was in excess of authority of the court and we agree, and reverse and remand for entry of further orders.
Homer D. Clark died testate, a resident of Monroe County, Iowa, on March 20,
Page 140
1967, and thereafter, on April 4, 1967, his last will and testament was admitted to probate, and Hugh W. Lundy, one of the defendants herein, who was nominated in said will, was appointed executor.After directing the payment of his debts and funeral expenses and the expense of administration of his estate, the testator gave and bequeathed unto his wife, Inez E. Clark, who now survives at age 81, all of his personal property, and further devised and bequeathed unto his widow a one-third interest in value of his farm in Monroe County consisting of approximately 382 acres. He then directed that his son, Kenneth H. Clark, one of the defendants, 'shall have the first refusal for the purchase of my farm, on the basis of $22,000.00 for the entire farm, provided he makes arrangements to do so within one year from the date of my demise; otherwise, I direct my executor hereinafter named to sell said farmland without order of court to the highest bidder and divide the proceeds from the sale subject to the provisions of items I and II hereof.' The items I and II referred to are those provisions in the will which provide for the payment of debts and also the payment to the widow of one-third interest in the value of the farm.
On March 4, 1968, the defendant Kenneth H. Clark filed in the probate proceedings then pending in Monroe County a notice of his intention to purchase the farm in accordance with the testamentary permission. Also on March 4, 1968, the plaintiffs filed objections to the sale of the real estate to Kenneth H. Clark by the executor, asserting the market value of the lands owned by the decedent is in excess of $60,000 and the value of the share inherited by plaintiff Inez E. Clark can and will exceed the sum of $22,000, and therefore there is a conflict under the fact situation between the various provisions of the decedent's will and that the provisions for the payment of one-third in value of his real estate to his widow are paramount and govern the disposition of the farmland to the end the provisions of the will providing the defendant Kenneth H. Clark may be permitted to purchase the same for the sum of $22,000 are therefore inoperative and void. The will provided in the event Kenneth H. Clark failed or refused to purchase the farm for $22,000 within one year, or to make arrangements for the purchase within one year from the testator's death, that the proceeds of the farm after its sale by the executor should be divided one-fourth to Kenneth H. Clark, one-fourth each to the plaintiffs Lloyd W. Clark, Melvine L. Clark and Glenn D. Clark, subject to the payment to the widow of the one-third interest in value of the real estate.
In their objections to the sale of the real estate by the executor to Kenneth H. Clark, plaintiffs allege defendant Kenneth H. Clark had a number of judgments against him of record in Monroe County approximating $4000 in amount, that the costs of sale of the farm to him would approximate $1000, and if he were required to finance the purchase of the farm he would be required to borrow approximately $27,000 to effectuate the same.
On February 28, 1968, in advance of the filing of notice of defendant's intention to purchase the farm, plaintiffs, being the widow and three sons of the decedent, filed in the probate proceedings a petition for construction of will, and on the same date the widow, Inez E. Clark, filed her election not to take under the terms of the will. Resistance to objections to the sale of real estate was filed by the defendant Kenneth H. Clark, as was a motion to strike the petition for construction of will.
On June 19, 1969, hearing was had before the Honorable Arthur A. McGivern, Judge of the District Court for Monroe County, all parties being present in open court with their respective counsel. A stipulation and agreement to 'settle all matters which are in issue * * * and matters directly arising therefrom under the factual situation arising in connection with this estate' was dictated into the record by Judge McGivern. The stipulation
Page 141
which was agreed to in open court by counsel for all parties, with all...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Marti, 62510
...e. g., McNamara, 252 Iowa at 27, 104 N.W.2d at 573, or by oral agreement of the parties in open court, see, e. g., In re Estate of Clark, 181 N.W.2d 138, 140-41 (Iowa 1970). Accord, State v. Saia, 172 Conn. 37, 41, 372 A.2d 144, 147 (1976); Colbert v. Commonwealth, 306 S.W.2d 825, 827 (Ky.1......
-
Cohen v. Clark, 18-2173
...("Stipulations as to the law do not settle for the court what the law is, and consequently are of no validity."); In re Estate of Clark , 181 N.W.2d 138, 142 (Iowa 1970) (explaining stipulations of fact are binding on the parties but stipulations as to legal issues are not binding on this c......
-
Graen's Mens Wear, Inc. v. Stille-Pierce Agency, STILLE-PIERCE
...different interpretations on a stipulation. State v. Schreck, 258 Iowa 218, 223, 137 N.W.2d 914, 916 (1965). In Estate of Clark v. Lundy, 181 N.W.2d 138, 143 (Iowa 1970), we also noted that stipulations are of two kinds. The first is a mere admission of fact, relieving a party from the inco......
-
Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. Shook, 65384
...on August 20. Like the commissioner and district court, we will disregard the mistake in the stipulation. See Estate of Clark v. Lundy, 181 N.W.2d 138, 143 (Iowa The union maintained a workers' compensation policy which Shook testified covered union employees "being paid by the local union ......