Hannon v. Scanlon
| Decision Date | 06 October 1914 |
| Citation | 158 Wis. 357,148 N.W. 1082 |
| Parties | HANNON ET AL. v. SCANLON. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Marinette County; William B. Quinlan, Judge.
Suit by George Hannon and others against Joseph Scanlon. Judgment for defendant, and complainants appeal. Affirmed.
This is an appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint. The complaint alleges that on May 15, 1912, one Lucy Scanlon died leaving surviving her two minor children, Helen Hannon Scanlon and George Joseph Scanlon, a husband, Joseph Scanlon, an aunt, Sarah Hannon, and an uncle, George Hannon; that said Lucy Scanlon died possessed of personal property and seised of a large amount of realty, among which were three 40's, 120 acres, one 40 being formerly the homestead of one Henry Donnelly; that on June 4, 1912, an alleged will was filed in the office of the county judge of Marinette county purporting to be a will of Lucy Scanlon, which will devised and bequeathed all the real and personal property owned by said Lucy Scanlon to said Joseph Scanlon; that a day was set for the hearing of proofs of said will; that George Hannon and Sarah Hannon, having good reason to believe that said will was not executed according to law, that said Lucy Scanlon had not sufficient mental capacity to make a will, and that the execution was procured by undue influence, filed objections to the allowance of said will; that on said hearing the following stipulation was made in open court:
“State of Wisconsin. In County Court, Marinette County. In the Matter of the Estate of Lucy Scanlon, Deceased. Kaftan & Reynolds appearing for Joseph Scanlon, legatee under the will of Lucy Scanlon, deceased. J. C. Morgan, guardian ad litem of Helen Hannon Scanlon and George Joseph Scanlon, minor heirs of said Lucy Scanlon, deceased. Martin, Martin & Martin appearing for George Hannon and Sarah Hannon, contestants of the will of Lucy Scanlon, deceased.
It is hereby stipulated by and between Joseph Scanlon, legatee of the will of Lucy Scanlon, deceased, and George Hannon and Sarah Hannon, contestants of said will, each by their respective attorneys, and by and with the consent of the guardian ad litem, and in person, in open court, that the said contestants hereby withdraw their objections to the allowance of said will, for and in consideration of the said Joseph Scanlon, legatee herein named and on the condition that he, the said Joseph Scanlon convey by proper conveyance to each of the said minor children one of the forty acres of land heretofore owned by Henry Donnelly, deceased, which said property is devised and bequeathed by the will of said Lucy Scanlon, deceased, to the said Joseph Scanlon, as sole heir of Henry Donnelly, deceased, whose said estate is now in process of probate in this court, and for and in consideration of the said Joseph Scanlon agreeing to pay the debts against the estate of the said Lucy Scanlon, deceased.
And it is further agreed that the said Joseph Scanlon shall receive the entire estate of the said Lucy Scanlon, deceased, except the forty acres herein provided to be conveyed to each of the said minor children, which said two forty-acre tracts shall be conveyed to the said minor children free and clear from any and all claims which may be made against the estate of Lucy Scanlon, deceased. The said Joseph Scanlon shall retain and have for himself the forty-acre tract constituting the homestead of Henry Donnelly, deceased, and upon which the buildings are located. The said Joseph Scanlon shall have two mowers, one hayrake, two drags and three plows, which property is part of the estate of Henry Donnelly, deceased, and located in the township of Grover, at the prices named in the inventory, now on file in the county court of Marinette county, and also a certain quantity of lumber now located in the village of Coleman, which is also a part of the estate of the said Henry Donnelly, deceased. Each party to pay its own costs of this contest.
It is hereby further stipulated by and between the parties hereto that the said Joseph Scanlon will pay out of the rent or income of the estate of the said Henry Donnelly, deceased, the sum of one hundred dollars per annum, so long as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Huttig v. Brennan
...contract, in the form it was left by the signers, was so indefinite as to be unenforcible. Goldstine v. Tolman, 157 Wis. 141; Hannon v. Scanlon, 158 Wis. 357; Rollin Pickett, 2 Hill (N. Y.) 552; Gigos v. Cochran, 54 Ind. 593; Vickers v. Henry, 110 N.C. 371; Brooks v. Halane, 116 Ill.App. 38......
-
Huttig v. Brennan
...contract, in the form it was left by the signers, was so indefinite as to be unenforcible. Goldstine v. Tolman, 157 Wis. 141; Hannon v. Scanlon, 158 Wis. 357; Rollin v. Pickett, 2 Hill (N.Y.) 552; Gigos v. Cochran, 54 Ind. 593; Vickers v. Henry, 110 N.C. 371; Brooks v. Halane, 116 Ill. App.......
-
Trimble v. Wisconsin Builders, Inc.
...v. Moe (1972), 53 Wis.2d 620, 623, 193 N.W.2d 645; Wirthwein v. Dailey (1923), 182 Wis. 200, 201, 196 N.W. 221; Hannon v. Scanlon (1914), 158 Wis. 357, 361, 148 N.W. 1082; Estate of Rosenthal (1945), 247 Wis. 555, 561, 20 N.W.2d 643; Durkin v. Machesky (1922), 177 Wis. 595, 188 N.W. 97; Thi......
-
Durkin v. MacHesky
...be invoked. Both the civil and the circuit judge found the description insufficient, and we are of the same opinion. Hannon v. Scanlon, 158 Wis. 357, 148 N. W. 1082;Harney v. Burhans, 91 Wis. 348, 64 N. W. 1031;Inglis v. Foley, 136 Wis. 28, 116 N. W. 857. [4] The circuit court held, however......