In re Decker's Estate

• Decision Date: 10 January 1919
• Docket Number: 14872.
• Citation: 105 Wash. 221,177 P. 718
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: In re DECKER'S ESTATE.

177 P. 718

105 Wash. 221

In re DECKER'S ESTATE.

No. 14872.

Supreme Court of Washington

January 10, 1919

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, Adams County; John Truax, Judge.

In the matter of the estate of Benjamin L. Decker, deceased. From a judgment distributing certain property, Spaulding Manufacturing Company appeals. Affirmed.

Samuel P. Weaver, of Sprague, for appellant.

G. E Lovell and C. W. Rathbun, both of Ritzville, for respondent.

MAIN C.J.

The parties to this appeal are rival claimants to an undivided one-fifth interest in a certain quarter section of land located in Grant county. The appellants, doing business under the name of the Spaulding Manufacturing Company, claim title through a judgment sale on execution, and a sheriff's deed. The respondent claims title through an alleged assignment from the person to whom the property passed by devise. Benjamin L. Decker died testate on or about the 24th day of August, 1913, and by his will devised to John V. Decker an undivided one-fifth interest in the real estate in controversy. The will was duly admitted to probate in Adams county on February 28, 1914. On May 8, 1917 the executor filed his final account and petition for distribution, praying that the interest of John V. Decker in the real estate above referred to be distributed to L. A. Womach. The appellants filed objection to the final account and denied that the property should be distributed to Womach, who claimed under an assignment from John V. Decker. The respondent Womach objected to the litigation of the controversy over the title to the property in the probate proceeding, and claimed that it was not a proper matter to be litigated therein. The property was distributed by the trial court to Womach, as assignee. From this judgment the appeal was prosecuted.

The respondent renews here the objection which he made in the trial court that the controversy over the title to the property between the parties to this appeal could not be litigated in the probate proceeding. This objection must be sustained. This is a controversy between outside parties which in no way affects the interests of the estate itself. In Re Gorkow's Estate, 28 Wash. 65, 68 P. 174, a similar question was presented. In that case a legatee had contracted with a firm of attorneys that she would pay them the sum of $500 when they should obtain for her a certain legacy contained in the will of Rudolph Gorkow. By the contract the $500 was to be paid out of the legacy when collected. In due time the right to the legacy was established and with the exception of $500 was paid to the legatee, who refused to recognize the rights of the attorneys, whom she had employed. The attorneys filed a petition in the probate proceeding asking that the $500 be paid to them. The legatee objected to the question being litigated in that proceeding because it was a...