In re Adkin's Estate
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | SMITH, Justice. |
| Citation | In re Adkin's Estate, 167 P.2d 618, 161 Kan. 239 (Kan. 1946) |
| Decision Date | 06 April 1946 |
| Docket Number | 36443. |
| Parties | In re ADKINS' ESTATE. v. FOUNTAIN et al. HOUGH et al. |
Rehearing Denied May 10, 1946.
Appeal from District Court, Reno County; Franklin B. Hettinger Judge.
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of Jessie Adkins, deceased wherein Betty Jean Hough and others sought to probate what purported to be the separate will of decedent. In the same proceedings what purported to be a joint will of E. L. and Jessie Adkins was offered for probate by A. S. Fountain and others. The proceedings were consolidated and what purported to be the second will of Jessie Adkins was admitted to probate. The objectants appealed to the district court where the second will was admitted, and from the judgment of the district court, Betty Jean Hough and others appeal.
Reversed with directions.
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Where a husband and wife made a joint and mutual will wherein each bequeathed to the survivor a life estate in all his property with a provision that the remainder should go to a third person, and one of the testators died and the survivor secured the probate of the will and took under it pursuant to its terms, and the will on its face showed it was made as the result of a contract between the two testators, the property of both passed according to the terms of the joint and mutual will.
2. Where a will such as that described in the first paragraph of this syllabus was executed by two testators and later one of them died and the survivor took under the provisions of the joint will and subsequently made another will by which different bequests were made than were made in the first will, held, that the second will is entitled to probate as the last will of the testator, but there is nothing for it to operate on because all of the property of each testator passed according to the terms of the first will which will be enforced as a contract.
3. In a case where two wills such as described in the foregoing paragraph of this syllabus were executed and both wills were offered for probate and also a request that the first will be enforced as a contract against the property of the testator, it is proper that all matters should be set down for hearing pursuant to G.S.1943 Supp. 59-2225.
4. In a proceeding such as that described in the foregoing paragraph of this syllabus, the proper order is for the probate court to admit the second will to probate but order the first will enforced as a contract.
Max Wyman, of Hutchinson (Erskine Wyman, Aaron Coleman, and Fred Preble, all of Hutchinson, on the brief), for appellants.
H. R. Branine, of Hutchinson (Walter F. Jones, C. E. Chalfant, and J. Richards Hunter, all of Hutchinson, on the brief), for appellees.
This was a proceeding to probate what purported to be the separate will of Jessie Adkins, dated October 18, 1941. In the same proceedings what purported to be a joint will of E. L. and Jessie Adkins under date of October 31, 1939, was offered for probate as the will of Jessie Adkins. Objections and exceptions to probate of the separate will were filed and also proceedings asking that the joint will be probated as the will of Jessie Adkins and if it was not probated that it be enforced as a contract against the property of Jessie Adkins. All these matters were consolidated and after a hearing before the probate court what purported to be the second will of Jessie Adkins was admitted to probate. The parties who objected to the probate of this will and had offered the joint will appealed to the district court where the second will was admitted. The same parties have appealed.
The facts are substantially as follows: E. L. Adkins and Jessie Adkins were husband and wife. On October 31, 1939, they were living together and presented themselves to their lawyer who drew a will which was duly executed by them that day. It will be referred to herein as the joint will. It is headed 'Last Will and Testament of E. L. and Jessie Adkins, Husband and Wife.' Underneath the above appear the words '(Joint Will.)' It is as follows:
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Miller's Estate, In re
...joint, or joint and mutual, or otherwise.' 117 Kan. at pages 216, 217, 230 P. at page 1069. Reference is also made to In re Estate of Adkins, 161 Kan. 239, 167 P.2d 618. The existence or nonexistence of an agreement or contract is in its very nature a fact. In the cases where wills have bee......
-
Moats v. Pumphrey's Estate
...D.1965), aff'd 34 Ill.2d 295, 215 N.E.2d 245 (1966); In re Weidman's Estate, 181 Kan. 718, 314 P.2d 327 (1957); In re Estate of Adkins, 161 Kan. 239, 167 P.2d 618 (1946); Tutunjian v. Vetzigian, 299 N.Y. 315, 87 N.E.2d 275 (1949); Rastetter v. Hoenninger, 214 N.Y. 66, 108 N.E. 210 (1915); S......
-
Ciochon's Estate, Matter of
...243; In re Estate of Chronister, 203 Kan. 366, 454 P.2d 438; Beall v. Hardie, 177 Kan. 353, 279 P.2d 276 (1955); In re Estate of Adkins, 161 Kan. 239, 167 P.2d 618 (1946); Lewis v. Lewis, 104 Kan. 269, 178 P. 421 What effect did the execution of the joint, mutual and contractual will have o......
-
Duncan's Estate, Matter of
...for probate, even though it may be ineffective to transfer property insofar as it violates the original contract. In re Estate of Adkins, 161 Kan. 239, 167 P.2d 618 (1946); Frontier Lodge v. Wilson, 139 Kan. 75, 30 P.2d 307 The general rule is that a joint will is, in effect, the separate w......