Gaven v. Allen
Decision Date | 22 March 1890 |
Citation | 100 Mo. 293,13 S.W. 501 |
Parties | GAVEN v. ALLEN. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
1. A testator devised his property to his wife, providing, however, that in case of her remarrying, it should be divided among his children. She was empowered to act, as to the sale of his property, "as she may think best for the benefit of herself and my children." Held, that the will gave her power to convey a perfect title in fee.
2. Rev. St. Mo. 1879, §§ 3992, 3993, providing for the filing of a copy of a will under which one claims property in the state, apply to a will probated in a foreign country as well as to one probated in another state.
Appeal from St. Louis circuit court.
Gist Blair, for appellant. Leonard Wilcox, for respondent.
Anthony Gaven, a citizen of Great Britain, residing in Ireland, died testate in September, 1880, being then the owner in fee of the parcel of real estate now in question, which is situate in the city of St. Louis, in this state. The will was probated in Ireland, and a copy thereof, and of the probate, recorded in the city of St. Louis. The plaintiff is the widow of the testator and claims the property by the will of her husband. She sold it to the defendant; and this is a suit brought by her, as vendor, for the specific performance of that contract. The case is here by appeal from the judgment of the circuit court sustaining a demurrer to the petition; and the questions are whether by the will the plaintiff has a fee-simple, absolute title; and, if not, then whether the will gives her power to convey a perfect title in fee.
The will, omitting formal parts, is as follows:
1. The clause in this will which declares that, if the wife of the testator should happen to get married, then the above-mentioned property, or any money or property hereafter mentioned, shall be divided among his children, applies alike to the property previously mentioned and of that covered by the residuary clause. Unless this is so, the words "or any money or property hereafter mentioned" must be disregarded. The intention of the testator is too plain to admit of any question. The plaintiff acquired the property now in question under and by virtue of the residuary clause, and she...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Middleton v. Dudding
...this case. Am. & Eng. Ency. Law (2d Ed.) 449; Russell v. Eubanks, 84 Mo. 82-88, and cases cited; Harbison v. James, 90 Mo. 411 ; Gaven v. Allen, 100 Mo. 293 ; Lewis v. Pitman, 101 Mo. 281-291 ; Greffet v. Willman, 114 Mo. 106 ; Evans v. Folks, 135 Mo. 397-403 ; Garland v. Smith, 164 Mo. 1 ;......
-
Grace v. Perry
... ... property described. Campbell v. Johnson, 65 Mo. 439; ... Wead v. Gray, 78 Mo. 64; Boyer v. Allen, 76 ... Mo. 498. The word used in this will, "dispose," is ... much broader than the word "sell." There is no ... limitation to the manner of ... Ency. Law (2 Ed.), 449; Russell v ... Eubanks, 84 Mo. 82 at 82-88, and cases cited; ... Harbison v. James, 90 Mo. 411, 2 S.W. 292; Gaven ... v. Allen, 100 Mo. 293, 13 S.W. 501; Lewis v ... Pitman, 101 Mo. 281 at 281-291, 14 S.W. 52; Greffet ... v. Willman, 114 Mo. 106, 21 S.W ... ...
-
Hines v. Hines
... ... [ Schulenberg v. Campbell, 14 Mo. 491; Richardson ... v. De Giverville, 107 Mo. 422, 17 S.W. 974; Gaven v ... Allen, 100 Mo. 293, 13 S.W. 501; Keith v ... Keith, 97 Mo. 223; Lucas v. Tucker, 17 Ind. 41; ... Hughes v. Hughes, 14 La. Ann. 85; ... ...
-
Masterson v. Masterson
...S.W. 872; Brandt v. Virginia Coal & Iron Co., 93 U.S. 927; Emert v. Blair, 118 S.W. 688; Maddox v. Yoe, 122 Md. 288, 88 A. 225; Gavin v. Allen, 100 Mo. 299; Brammel v. Adams, 146 Mo. 80, 47 S.W. 931; v. Pittman, 101 Mo. 281; 1 Schuler on Wills, p. 716. Clarence F. Wescoat for respondent. (1......