Kosmerl v. Snively

• Decision Date: 17 January 1902
• Citation: 85 Minn. 228,88 N.W. 753
• Parties: KOSMERL et al. v. SNIVELY et al (two cases).
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

85 Minn. 228

88 N.W. 753

KOSMERL et al.

v.SNIVELY et al (two cases).

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Jan. 17, 1902.

Appeals from district court, St. Louis county; Wm. A. Cant, Judge.

Action by F. S. Kosmerl and others against S. F. Snively and others. Demurrers to the answers were overruled, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

In an action to quiet the title to real property, brought against the administrator of the estate of a deceased person, former owner of the property, and his unknown heirs, certain persons claiming to be such heirs appeared and answered, setting forth in their separate answers that they were heirs of the deceased, and claiming title to the property. On a general demurrer by plaintiff to such answers, it is held that the allegations that defendants are the heirs of deceased are admitted, and it is immaterial that the question as to which of defendants are the rightful heirs has not been determined by the probate court. Francis W. Sullivan and Towne & Merchant, for appellants.

C. S. Williston, Alexander Marshall, George P. Knowles, R. R. Briggs, John G. Williams, Warner E. Whipple, and W. E. Pickering, for respondents.

BROWN, J.

This action was brought to quiet the title to certain real property in St. Louis county which plaintiffs claim to own; having derived their title through one Johann Mueller, now deceased. The action was brought against the administrator and the unknown heirs of deceased. The respondents appeared in the action and interposed two separate answers; each answer alleging in defense that they are the heirs of deceased, and own the property in question, and also alleging and pointing out certain defects in plaintiffs' alleged title. Plaintiffs interposed general demurrers to the answers, which were overruled by the court below, and they appealed.

The only point made in this court as to the sufficiency of the answers is that there is no allegation therein that the question whether defendants are in fact the heirs of deceased has ever been adjudicated or determined by the probate court of St. Louis county, in which court the estate of deceased is being probated and administered. It is also claimed that the jurisdiction of the probate court to determine who are the rightful heirs is exclusive, and that until that question is there determined the district court has no jurisdiction to inquire into it. We do not attempt to pass upon this question. It is not before the court. Defendants...