Everett v. Croskrey
Decision Date | 23 October 1894 |
Parties | EVERETT ET AL. v. CROSKREY ET UX. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from district court, Tama county; John R. Caldwell, Judge.
This is an action for the partition of certain real estate. There was a decree for the plaintiffs. Defendants appeal.W. H. Stivers and W. B. Louthan, for appellants.
Struble & Stiger, for appellees.
1. The land involved in the suit is a tract of land of about 60 acres. It was formerly owned by Thomas Everett, who, by his last will and testament, devised it to his two daughters, Lavina Halstead and Caroline Croskrey, in equal shares. The plaintiff Sarah Everett purchased and now owns the undivided one-half of said land, which formerly belonged to Lavina Halstead. Caroline Croskrey continued to own the other undivided one-half until her death, which occurred in May, 1884. She had no issue, and the defendant Jacob Croskrey is her surviving husband. A short time before her death, Caroline Croskrey made her last will and testament, of which the following is a copy: The said will was on the 24th day of November, 1885, duly admitted to probate. Before and after the probate of the will, written notices of its provisions were duly served on the defendant Jacob Croskrey.
Thomas Everett, the original owner of the land, left a widow surviving him, to whom he devised a life estate in the land. The widow died December 23, 1891; and at her death the devisees of the fee, and their grantees and representatives, became entitled to the possession of the property.
When Jacob Croskrey was served with notice of the provisions of the will, he took no action in the way of consenting thereto, and has at no time since, in any manner, made any election to accept its provisions. It is provided by section 2452 of the Code that “the widow's share cannot be affected by any will of her husband unless she consents thereto within six months after notice to her of the provisions of the will by the other parties interested in the estate which consent shall be entered on the proper records of the district court.” A...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McGaughey v. Eades
... ... Ill. 242; Warren v. Warren, 148 Ill. 641; Garn ... v. Garn, 135 Ind. 690; Burden v. Burden, 141 ... Ind. 471; Kyne Kyne, 48 Iowa 21: Everett v ... Croskrey, 92 Iowa 333; Pratt v. Felton, 4 Cush ... (Mass.), 174; Reed v. Dickerman, 12 Pick ... (Mass.), 146; Craven v. Craven, Dev. Eq ... ...
- Everett v. Croskrey