In re Myhren's Estate
| Decision Date | 26 February 1917 |
| Docket Number | 13578. |
| Citation | In re Myhren's Estate, 163 P. 388, 95 Wash. 101 (Wash. 1917) |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | In re MYHREN'S ESTATE. v. MYHREN. MYHREN |
Department 2. Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; E. H Sullivan, Judge.
Proceeding in the matter of the Estate of Peter A. Myhren, deceased, by Maria Myhren, executrix of said decedent, against Helen A Myhren, executrix of Albert P. Myhren, deceased, and others. From the decree, said Helen A. Myhren, as executrix, appeals. Dismissed.
McCarthy, Edge & Davis and W. G. Boland, all of Spokane, for appellant.
Carl W Swanson and C. E. Ellis, both of Spokane, for respondent.
This is an appeal from a decree in probate construing the last will and testament of Peder A. Myhren, deceased. Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal, and the pertinent facts are these: The testator was survived by his widow and executrix, Maria Myhren, and five adult children, viz. Edward Myhren, Elsie Myhren, Bertilde Erdman, née Myhren, Martin Myhren, an incompetent person who was represented in the proceeding by his guardian ad litem C. E. Ellis, and Albert P. Myhren, who subsequently died leaving as his survivors his widow and executrix, Helen A. Myhren, and a minor daughter, Doris Myhren, who was represented by her guardian ad litem Joseph McCarthy. All of the five above-named adult children are named as beneficiaries in the will. The estate consists wholly of community property. The provisions of the will which need be noticed are as follows:
During the course of administration of the estate Maria Myhren, the widow and executrix of Peder A. Myhren, filed in the probate proceeding a petition setting forth that the estate could not be distributed until the will had been construed by the court, and in her individual right asserted that the will should be construed as operating only upon the community interest of the testator in and to the property described in the will, and that she was the owner in fee of her community interest in the property free from the operation of the provisions of the will. The questions presented by the petition were whether the testator had undertaken by his will to dispose of the entire community property as though it were his separate estate, and, if so, whether the widow was put to an election between her right under the law to her community interest in the property and her rights as beneficiary under the will. Upon the filing of the petition the court made and entered an order fixing a time for hearing the same, and directed that a citation issue and be served upon all of the above-named parties. The citation was in the form prescribed by section 1281, Rem. Code, and was duly served on all the parties as directed by the court. At the time designated for the hearing all of the parties were present in court either in person or by counsel, or both, the hearing was duly had, and thereafter the court made findings of fact and conclusions of law, and entered a decree to the effect that the will of Peder A. Myhren operated only upon his community interest in the property, and that the widow was not required to elect. The decree contains the following recital of jurisdictional facts:
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
-
Deno v. Standard Furniture Co.
... ... by the judgment--whether favorably or unfavorably. In fact, ... the rule was so stated in Re Myhren's Estate, 95 ... Wash. 101, 163 P. 388, 390: 'It is suggested that, if the ... appeal should be entertained and the decree of the lower ... ...
-
United Truck Lines, Inc. v. Department of Public Works of Washington
...Mortgage Co. v. Thomas, 63 Wash. 316, 115 P. 312; Crawford v. Seattle, R. & S. Ry. Co., 92 Wash. 670, 159 P. 782; In re Myhren's Estate, 95 Wash. 101, 163 P. 388; Cole v. Washington Motion Picture Corp., 112 Wash. 548, 192 P. 972; Campbell v. Nichols, 131 Wash. 1, 228 P. 833; Puget Sound Sa......
-
Studebaker v. Buckingham
... ... v. Gaston, 78 Wash. 598, ... 139 P. 641; McKay v. Stephens, 81 Wash. 306, 142 P ... 662; In re Myhren's Estate, 95 Wash. 101, 163 P ... 388; Cole v. Wash. Motion Picture Corp., 112 Wash ... 548, 192 P. 972; Campbell v. Nichols, 131 Wash. 1, ... ...
-
Puget Sound Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Erickson
...Some of our other cases to the same effect are Crawford v. Seattle, Renton & S. R. Co., 159 P. 782, 92 Wash. 670; In re Myhren's Estate, 163 P. 388, 95 Wash. 101; and Studebaker Buckingham (Wash.) 240 P. 4. On behalf of the appellant other cases of this court have been cited and discussed, ......