In re Auritt's Estate, 24661.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Washington
Writing for the Court[175 Wash. 304] STEINERT, Justice.
Citation175 Wash. 303,27 P.2d 713
PartiesIn re AURITT'S ESTATE.
Docket Number24661.
Decision Date07 December 1933

27 P.2d 713

175 Wash. 303

In re AURITT'S ESTATE.

No. 24661.

Supreme Court of Washington

December 7, 1933


Department 1.

Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; Joseph B. Lindsley, Judge.

Petition by Gertrude Sillman Wolfe and another to establish and admit to probate a lost will, executed by Rosa Auritt, deceased, opposed by George Sillman. From an order establishing the will and admitting it to probate, contestant appeals.

Affirmed. [27 P.2d 714]

Hamblen, Gilbert & Brooke, of Spokane, for appellant.

Tustin & Chandler, of Spokane, for respondents.

[175 Wash. 304] STEINERT, Justice.

This is a proceeding to establish and admit to probate a lost will, executed by Rosa Auritt, now deceased. The petitioners in the proceedings below were Gertrude Sillman Wolfe and William Sillman, Jr., niece and nephew, respectively, of the deceased. Resistance to the will was offered by George Sillman, brother of the deceased. Issues having been joined, a hearing was had, following which the court entered an order establishing the will and admitting it to probate. From that order, George Sillman has appealed. The petitioners above named are the respondents herein.

For several years prior to her death, Rosa Auritt, a widow, had made her home in Spokane with her brother, William Sillman, Sr., the father of respondents herein. It appears that Mrs. Auritt and her brother William owned, or were interested in, a farm near Prosser, and a day or two prior to May 23, 1932, had driven from Spokane to Prosser on some business connected with the farm. In their automobile they carried a quantity of dynamite, presumably to be used in clearing operations upon the land. While they were driving upon the highway near the farm at about 9 o'clock in the forenoon of May 23d, the dynamite exploded, demolishing the car and instantly killing both of its occupants.

From a subsequent inquiry and investigation, it was learned that on January 27, 1931, William Sillman, Sr., had executed a will in which the respondents were made the sole devisees; by a codicil dated February 4, 1931, the sum of $3,000 was bequeathed to Rosa Auritt, payable in annual installments of $1,000, the legacy to lapse, however, in the event of Mrs. Auritt's death prior to completion of the payments. With this will we are not immediately concerned in this action; we mention[175 Wash. 305] it only because it indicates the affection that existed between Mr. Sillman and his sister. Through the same investigation and inquiry, it was also learned that Rosa Auritt had, on February 4, 1931, executed a will in which all of her property was bequeathed and devised to her brother, William Sillman, Sr., 'to have and to hold the same to himself and heirs, absolutely and forever.' It is this will that has given rise to this litigation. Neither of these wills has ever been found. In the proceeding below, a carbon copy of Rosa Auritt's will was identified and, over appellant's objection, was admitted in evidence.

Owing to the limited questions Before us on this appeal, it is unnecessary to cover in detail the evidence supplied by a rather voluminous record. We will confine ourselves to a statement of such further facts as are necessary to an understanding of the issues involved.

Under his first assignment of error, appellant contends that the court erred in concluding, holding, and deciding that the contents of Rosa Auritt's last will and testament had been established as required by law. The contention rests upon the provisions of Rem. Rev. Stat. § 1390, which, so far as it is applicable in this connection, reads as follows:

'* * * No will shall be allowed to be proved as a lost or destroyed will * * * unless its provisions shall be a clearly and distinctly proved by at least two witnesses. * * *'

There were three witnesses to the will: Glenn Cunningham, the attorney...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • Hull v. Cartin, 6706
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • July 27, 1940
    ...provisions of a lost will may be proved by secondary evidence. (I. C. A., sec. 16-411, subd. 1; Miller's Will, supra: Auritt's Estate, 175 Wash. 303, 27 P.2d 713; Hanna v. Magee, 189 Ark. 330, 72 S.W.2d 237; Drohan v. Avellar, 276 Mass. 441, 177 N.E. 583.) Statement. This case was heard at ......
  • Saliba v. Saliba, s. 15844, 15845.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • September 9, 1947
    ...152, § (e); Underbill on the Law of Wills 377, § 277; 28 R. C.L. 383, § 387; Rowland v. Holt, 253 Ky. 718, 70 S.W.2d 5; Auritt's Estate, 175 Wash. 303, 27 P.2d 713, 715, 716; Church-hill v. Dill, 145 Kan. 306, 65 P.2d 337, 339; Bradway v. Thompson, 139 Ark. 542, 214 S.W. 27, 31, 32; Compton......
  • Saliba v. Saliba, 15844
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • September 9, 1947
    ...152, § (e); Underhill on the Law of Wills 377, § 277; 28 R.C.L. 383,§ 387; Rowland v. Holt, 253 Ky. 718, 70 S.W.2d 5; Auritt's Estate, 175 Wash. 303, 27 P.2d 713, 715, 716; Churchhill v. Dill, 145 Kan. 306, 65 P.2d 337, 339; Bradway v. Thompson, 139 Ark. 542, 214 S.W. 27, 31, 32; Compton v.......
  • In re Estate of Bowers, 56108-1-I.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • April 3, 2006
    ...found after the death of the testator, the law presumes that it was destroyed by the testator animo revocandi." In re Estate of Auritt, 175 Wash. 303, 308, 27 P.2d 713 (1933); see also Nelson, 85 Wash.2d at 607, 537 P.2d 765 (recognizing that the language in RCW 11.20.070 (1993) was a codif......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • Hull v. Cartin, 6706
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • July 27, 1940
    ...provisions of a lost will may be proved by secondary evidence. (I. C. A., sec. 16-411, subd. 1; Miller's Will, supra: Auritt's Estate, 175 Wash. 303, 27 P.2d 713; Hanna v. Magee, 189 Ark. 330, 72 S.W.2d 237; Drohan v. Avellar, 276 Mass. 441, 177 N.E. 583.) Statement. This case was heard at ......
  • Saliba v. Saliba, s. 15844, 15845.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • September 9, 1947
    ...152, § (e); Underbill on the Law of Wills 377, § 277; 28 R. C.L. 383, § 387; Rowland v. Holt, 253 Ky. 718, 70 S.W.2d 5; Auritt's Estate, 175 Wash. 303, 27 P.2d 713, 715, 716; Church-hill v. Dill, 145 Kan. 306, 65 P.2d 337, 339; Bradway v. Thompson, 139 Ark. 542, 214 S.W. 27, 31, 32; Compton......
  • Saliba v. Saliba, 15844
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • September 9, 1947
    ...152, § (e); Underhill on the Law of Wills 377, § 277; 28 R.C.L. 383,§ 387; Rowland v. Holt, 253 Ky. 718, 70 S.W.2d 5; Auritt's Estate, 175 Wash. 303, 27 P.2d 713, 715, 716; Churchhill v. Dill, 145 Kan. 306, 65 P.2d 337, 339; Bradway v. Thompson, 139 Ark. 542, 214 S.W. 27, 31, 32; Compton v.......
  • In re Estate of Bowers, 56108-1-I.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Washington
    • April 3, 2006
    ...found after the death of the testator, the law presumes that it was destroyed by the testator animo revocandi." In re Estate of Auritt, 175 Wash. 303, 308, 27 P.2d 713 (1933); see also Nelson, 85 Wash.2d at 607, 537 P.2d 765 (recognizing that the language in RCW 11.20.070 (1993) was a codif......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT