Estate of Rogers, Matter of, No. 90-171

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtConsidered by McGIVERIN; ANDREASEN
Citation473 N.W.2d 36
PartiesIn the Matter of the ESTATE OF Emma ROGERS, Deceased. In the Matter of the LAWRENCE J. ROGERS TRUST, Barbara Wardenburg, Executor and Beneficiary, Appellee, v. Robert L. ROGERS, Appellant.
Decision Date17 July 1991
Docket NumberNo. 90-171

Page 36

473 N.W.2d 36
In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Emma ROGERS, Deceased.
In the Matter of the LAWRENCE J. ROGERS TRUST, Barbara Wardenburg, Executor and Beneficiary, Appellee,
v.
Robert L. ROGERS, Appellant.
No. 90-171.
Supreme Court of Iowa.
July 17, 1991.

Page 37

Philip A. Leff of Leff, Haupert & Traw, Iowa City, and L.G. Klein, Oxford, for appellant.

James Claypool of Claypool & Claypool, Williamsburg, for appellee.

Considered by McGIVERIN, C.J., and LARSON, LAVORATO, SNELL, and ANDREASEN, JJ.

ANDREASEN, J.

This appeal arises from a declaratory judgment interpreting a will and testamentary trust. The respondent urges that under options provided in the instruments, he is entitled to purchase two 40-acre tracts for a total of $36,000. The executor of the will urges that the purchase price under the will is $36,000 for an undivided half interest in the property and another $36,000 under the trust for the other undivided half interest. The district court ruled for the executor. On appeal, we transferred the case to the court of appeals which reversed the judgment of the district court on a divided vote. We granted further review and now vacate the court of appeals

Page 38

decision and affirm the district court judgment.

I. Background.

On December 7, 1983, Lawrence J. Rogers executed his Last Will and Testament. Article I provided for the establishment of a trust in the event his wife, Emma, survived him. The residue of his estate, including the two tracts of land in issue, were devised to this trust. Lawrence held the two tracts of land as a tenant in common with Emma.

The language in controversy is contained in Article II, and reads as follows:

I grant to my son, Robert Lawrence Rogers, the option to purchase either from my estate or from the trust established under paragraph 5 of Article I of this will, all of the right, title, and interest of my estate or said trust in the following tracts of real estate, at the purchase price indicated:

(A) The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 79 North, Range 7 West of the 5th P.M., at a purchase price of $500.00 per acre; and,

(B) The Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 79 North, Range 7 West of the 5th P.M., at a purchase price of $400.00 per acre.

Robert Lawrence Rogers shall have the right to purchase either or both of such tracts, but must exercise his option rights within thirty (30) days following (a) the date of death of Emma, if she survives me, or, (b) the date of my death in the event Emma does not survive me, by written notice of exercise given to (i) the then acting trustee or trustees of the trust established under Paragraph 5 of Article I of the will in the event Emma survives me, or, (ii) to the executor or executors of my estate in the event Emma does not survive me; and, in the event either or both of these options are exercised the total purchase price shall be paid by my said son to said trust or to my estate within sixty (60) days from the date of exercise.

Lawrence Rogers died July 27, 1984, survived by Emma. Accordingly, his interest in the two tracts went into the trust. Emma died on October 12, 1989. Barbara Wardenburg was appointed as executor of her estate, and on November 8, 1989, she filed a petition for Interpretation of Will and Trust.

Emma's will was executed on March 28, 1989, almost five years after Lawrence's death. Both wills were drafted by the same attorney. Emma's will, in pertinent part, reads as follows:

I grant to my son, Robert Lawrence Rogers, if he survives me, the option to purchase from my estate all of my right, title and interest in the following tracts of real estate, at the purchase price indicated:

(A) The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 79 North, Range 7 West of the 5th P.M., at a purchase price of $500.00 per acre; and,

(B) The Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 79 North, Range 7 West of the 5th P.M., at a purchase price of $400.00 per acre.

Robert Lawrence Rogers shall have the right to purchase either or both of such tracts but must exercise his option rights within thirty (30) days following the date of my death by written notice of exercise given to the executor of my estate; and, in the event either or both of these options are exercised the total purchase price shall be paid by my said son to my estate within sixty (60) days from the date of exercise. In the event either or both of the options are not exercised within the thirty (30) day option period, such option or options shall lapse.

Robert urges that the intent of his parents was for him to be able to purchase both forty acre tracts for a total of $36,000 ( [40 acres X $500] + [40 acres X $400] = $36,000), half to be paid to the trust and half to his mother's estate. Barbara takes the position that if Robert wishes to purchase the interests in the real property held by both of his parents, then he must pay

Page 39

$36,000 to the trust for the interest which was held by his father, and an equal amount to the estate for the interest which was held by his mother. This...

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 practice notes
  • Estate of Carpenter, Matter of, 93-1484
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 24, 1995
    ...of a will is equitable in nature and our review is de novo. Iowa Code § 633.33 (1993); Iowa R.App.P. 4; In re Estate of Rogers, 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa 1991); In re Estate of Anderson, 359 N.W.2d 479, 480 (Iowa 1984). We give weight to the trial court's findings of fact but they do not bind......
  • In re Estate of Klauzer, No. 20921
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • January 12, 2000
    ...Extrinsic evidence is admissible to clarify any ambiguity. In re Estate of Brown, 559 N.W.2d 818, 822 (ND 1997); In re Estate of Rogers, 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa [¶ 11.] The third clause in John's will, as set forth above, names each individual followed by their relationship to John. Olsons ......
  • In re Will of Uchtorff, 04-0288.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 18, 2005
    ...Review A declaratory judgment action to construe a will is tried in equity. Iowa Code § 633.33 (2003); see, e.g., In re Estate of Rogers, 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa 1991); Houts v. Jameson, 201 N.W.2d 466, 468 (Iowa 1972). Our review is de novo. Iowa R.App. P. 6.4; see In re Estate of Hurt, 68......
  • Roll v. Newhall, 15-1838
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 23, 2016
    ...the cardinal rule of will construction is that "the intent of the testator is the polestar and must prevail." In re Estate of Rogers , 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa 1991). In determining the testator's intent, we consider "(a) all of the language contained within the four corners of the will, (b)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
38 cases
  • In re Estate of Klauzer, No. 20921
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • January 12, 2000
    ...Extrinsic evidence is admissible to clarify any ambiguity. In re Estate of Brown, 559 N.W.2d 818, 822 (ND 1997); In re Estate of Rogers, 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa [¶ 11.] The third clause in John's will, as set forth above, names each individual followed by their relationship to John. Olsons ......
  • In re Will of Uchtorff, No. 04-0288.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 18, 2005
    ...Review A declaratory judgment action to construe a will is tried in equity. Iowa Code § 633.33 (2003); see, e.g., In re Estate of Rogers, 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa 1991); Houts v. Jameson, 201 N.W.2d 466, 468 (Iowa 1972). Our review is de novo. Iowa R.App. P. 6.4; see In re Estate of Hurt, 68......
  • Estate of Carpenter, Matter of, No. 93-1484
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 24, 1995
    ...of a will is equitable in nature and our review is de novo. Iowa Code § 633.33 (1993); Iowa R.App.P. 4; In re Estate of Rogers, 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa 1991); In re Estate of Anderson, 359 N.W.2d 479, 480 (Iowa 1984). We give weight to the trial court's findings of fact but they do not bind......
  • Roll v. Newhall, No. 15-1838
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 23, 2016
    ...the cardinal rule of will construction is that "the intent of the testator is the polestar and must prevail." In re Estate of Rogers , 473 N.W.2d 36, 39 (Iowa 1991). In determining the testator's intent, we consider "(a) all of the language contained within the four corners of the will, (b)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT