First Nat. Bank of Danville v. McMillan

• Decision Date: 20 September 1957
• Docket Number: No. 34317,34317
• Citation: 12 Ill.2d 61,145 N.E.2d 60
• Parties: The FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF DANVILLE, Illinois, Conservator, Appellant, v. Roy Forrest McMILLAN, Executor, et al., Appellees.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 60

145 N.E.2d 60

12 Ill.2d 61

The FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF DANVILLE, Illinois, Conservator, Appellant, v. Roy Forrest McMILLAN, Executor, et al., Appellees.

No. 34317.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Sept. 20, 1957.

Bookwalter, Carter, Gunn & Hickman, Danville (R. Z. Hickman, Danville, of counsel), for appellant.

Acton, Baldwin, Bookwalter & Meyer, Danville (D. S. Baldwin, Danville, of counsel), for appellees.

DAVIS, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of Vermilion County, denying leave to The First National Bank of Danville, Illinois, conservator of the estate of Samuel V. Jinkins, incompetent, to renounce the will of its ward's deceased spouse, Ethel C. Jinkins. The decree was entered on Appeal and trial de novo from a like order of the probate court.

The pleadings consist of the petition for leave to renounce the will, founded on the best interest of the ward's estate, and the objections thereto filed by the executor and heirs of the decedent, as respondents. The appeal is directed to this court because a freehold is involved.

The evidence established that the decedent, at the time of her death, owned fifty-nine acres of land in southern Illinois, having an estimated worth of $2800, and an undivided one-half interest in seven residential properties in the city of Danville, valued at not to exceed $31,000, as well as personal property appraised at $1000; that the ward individually owned farm land calculated to be worth $400,000, subject to encumbrances of approximately $59,200, as well as the remaining one-half interest in the seven residential properties in the city of Danville; that he is now under constant hospital care and is totally and permanently incompetent, both mentally and physically; that his closest relatives are either brothers and sisters, or nieces and nephews; that Jinkins was a bachelor, 50 years of age when he married Mrs. Jinkins, age 49, who had been married and had two adult sons; that the ward was 66 years of age when this case was heard in the circuit court and had a life expectancy of 11.96 years; that he had been hospitalized since February of 1954, due to a cerebral thrombosis caused by an arteriosclerosis cardiovascular disease; that prior to this disability, he had engaged in the practice of law; that at the time of this marriage, he owned the valuable farms heretofore referred to, and the decedent owned only the southern Illinois farm; that during the 16 years of their marriage, he accumulated seven parcels of real estate in the city of Danville, which included the house where they lived, and placed title to these properties in their names, as joint tenants; that for several years prior to her death, Mrs. Jinkins was so deaf that it was impossible to communicate with her other than by written memoranda; that before entering the hospital in February of 1954, Jinkins had written to her on the subject of the rights of each of them in the property of the other; that his stenographer found this memorandum in his desk on March 24, 1954, and delivered it to his conservator; and that it was subsequently admitted in evidence as petitioner's exhibit 1. It read in part:

'If I die 1st-you get all of my personal property and 1/2 of my real estate and a dower right in the other 1/2 of my real estate, which is 1/3 of the income for your life-or if you prefer you could convert the 1/3 dower in 1/2 of real estate to a 1/3 of 1/2 = or a 1/6 of the real estate, which added to the 1/2 statutory fee right would make 1/2 k 1/3 = 3 k 1/6 = 4/6 or 2/3 of all my real estate plus all my personal property after the payment of debts and costs of administration of my estate. Of course, that is exactly what the statute gives you-and I couldn't make a will and leave you any less-and I don't want to and wouldn't make a will-the statute is good enough for me and it should be for you too.

'Now, let's see what I get if you die 1st-I get 1/3 of all your personal property plus 1/3 of your real estate-2/3 of your personal property goes to Forrest and Elza equally, 1/2 to each-that is 1/3 of the whole each. The same is true of the real estate-1/3 to each of them and 1/3 to me. You couldn't make a will and leave any less to me and any more to them, because the surviving spouse can always if he or she desires renounce under a will giving nothing or less than the statutes gives and elect to take under the statute and get what the law gives the surviving spouse and what wise men-the lawmakers-have considered just, equitable, and right.

'Like old time religion, it, the statute, is good enough for me and should be for you too.

'You inherit much more under the statute if I die 1st than I would inherit under the statute if you die 1st because of the difference in the size of our estates.'

The evidence further proved that in March of 1954, about one month after the ward entered the hospital, the petitioner was appointed conservator on his behalf; that title to the seven parcels of real estate remained in joint tenancy until December 17, 1955, when Mrs. Jinkins executed a deed to a nominee, which stated its purpose to be 'to destroy the joint tenancy in deeds of record to the above described real estate;' that the nominee thereupon reconveyed these parcels of real estate to Mrs. Jinkins and the ultimate effect of these deeds was to cause the title to this real estate to vest in Samuel V. Jinkins and Ethel C. Jinkins, as tenants in common; that the deeds under consideration were admitted in evidence as petitioner's exhibits 3 and 4; that five days prior to the execution of these deeds, Ethel C. Jinkins executed a will which was admitted in evidence as respondents' exhibit 1 and contained the following provisions:

'SECOND: I give and bequeath to my husband, Samuel V. Jinkins, the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar. This bequest is made not because of any lack of affection for him, but because of the fact that he has considerable estate of his own and has on numerous occasions expressed a desire to me and my sons that all of my estate should be given to my two (2) sons.

'FOURTH: All the rest, residue and remainder of my estate, real, personal and mixed, wheresoever situate, I give, devise and bequeath to my sons, Roy Forrest McMillan and Elza Floyd McMillan, share and share alike, in fee simple. If either of my sons predecease me, his share shall go to his children.'

The evidence further shows that on the date this will was admitted to probate, the conservator filed petition for leave to renounce it; that during the year 1955, the conservator incurred expenses in the approximate sum of $20,000 for nursing and hospital care for its incompetent...