Elwell v. Stewart
Decision Date | 07 January 1922 |
Docket Number | 23,386 |
Citation | 110 Kan. 218,203 P. 922 |
Parties | DERINDA ELWELL, Appellee, v. CLYDE STEWART, as Executor of the Estate of HETTIE H. CULP, Deceased, Appellant |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided January, 1922
Appeal from Douglas district court; CHARLES A. SMART, judge.
Judgment affirmed.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
WILL--Bequest in Trust--Interpretation of Will--Beneficiary Entitled to Net Income of Property. Under a will giving the testatrix's property to a trustee for the use and benefit of her mother during her life and directing the trustee to sell so much of it as he might deem necessary for her care and maintenance the mother is to receive the whole of the net income of the property, although it is more than sufficient for her support.
Edward T. Riling, John J. Riling, both of Lawrence, and S.D. Scott, of Olathe, for the appellant.
J. W. Parker, and G. A. Roberds, both of Olathe, for the appellee.
Hettie H. Culp died testate leaving all her property to Clyde Stewart, the executor, in trust for the use of her mother, Derinda Elwell, during her life, any of the property remaining in his hands at her death to go to his two daughters. Mrs. Elwell brings this action for the construction of the will for the purpose of determining whether she is entitled to all the net income of the estate or only to so much as is necessary for her support. The trial court adopted the former interpretation and the executor appeals.
The only paragraph of the will requiring consideration reads as follows:
In support of the theory of the executor it is argued that a consideration of the entire paragraph reveals the testatrix' purpose to have been to provide for her mother's care and maintenance, the trustee to determine what and how much was necessary to that end. We cannot agree to this conclusion. As we...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. State Bd. of Equalization
...is money or its equivalent, generally speaking, it is the interest which it will earn.' 29 A. & E. Ency. of Law, 444.' (Elwell v. Stewart (1922) 110 Kan. 218, 203 P. 922; emphasis Our interpretation finds corroboration in section 6201, which imposes the use tax upon 'storage, use, or other ......
-
Home Builders Ass'n of Greater Kansas City v. City of Overland Park
...property because it is not tied to the type of activity for which the property is being employed. The City cites Elwell v. Stewart, 110 Kan. 218, 219, 203 Pac. 922 (1922), where the court " 'As a general rule the use of a thing does not mean the thing itself, but means that the user is to e......
-
Holmes v. Holmes
...citing the following cases: Rowe v. Rowe, 95 N.H. 241, 61 A.2d 526; McAllister v. Long, 206 Okl. 623, 246 P.2d 352; Elwell v. Stewart, 110 Kan. 218, 203 P. 922; Dillen v. Fancher, 193 Ark. 715, 102 S.W.2d 87. We find these cases from other jurisdictions are not persuasive, as the language o......
-
McAllister v. Long
...other than use it as she may deem fit and proper, during her lifetime. Use cannot be construed to mean to dispose of. In Elwell v. Stewart, 110 Kan. 218, 203 P. 922, the Court held: "As a general rule, the use of a thing does not mean the thing itself, but means that the user is to enjoy, h......