Martin v. Martin
Decision Date | 09 January 1915 |
Docket Number | 19,087 |
Citation | 145 P. 565,93 Kan. 714 |
Parties | LOYAL M. MARTIN, Appellant, v. LOYAL J. MARTIN, as Executor, etc., Appellee |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided. January, 1915.
Appeal from Chautauqua district court; ALLISON T. AYRES, judge.
Judgment affirmed.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
1. DESCENTS AND DISTRIBUTIONS--Laws of Kansas Govern. The laws of Kansas determine the descent and distribution of real estate situated in this state.
2. WILLS--No Ambiguity--Construction Not Necessary. When there is no ambiguity or uncertainty in the language used in the making of a will, a construction of the will is unnecessary and it will be enforced in accordance with the provisions thereof.
G. A. Chappell, of Newkirk, Okla., for the appellant.
Loyal J. Martin, of Tulsa, Okla., for the appellee; J. A. Ferrell, of Sedan, of counsel.
One D. D. Martin, of Newkirk, Okla., on October 12, 1909, executed his will at that place and it was duly attested by subscribing witnesses. He died February 5, 1911.
The will, omitting the certification, reads as follows:
"NEWKIRK, OKLA., Oct. 12th, 1909.
I, David D. Martin, of the City of Newkirk, County of Kay, State of Oklahoma, do hereby make, publish and declare this my last will and testament in the manner and form following:
George Martin, the father of the appellant and son of the testator, died in March preceding the making of the will, and it will be observed that neither George Martin nor the appellant were mentioned in the will, but that all of the property of the testator was devised to the wife and other children of the testator by the terms of the will.
On March 25, 1911, a hearing was had in the probate court of Kay county, Oklahoma, on the petition of Loyal J. Martin to have the will admitted to probate, to which the appellant, Loyal M. Martin, had filed objections. At the hearing, however, the appellant made no appearance. The order of the court was as follows:
It was further ordered that the will be admitted to probate, and that the same is established as a valid will, passing both real and personal estate, in such manner as may be hereafter defined by the court's decree of distribution. It was also ordered that Loyal J. Martin, named as executor in the will, be appointed executor by the court. An order was made for bond, which was given.
It appears that a petition of appellant in the probate court of Kay county, Oklahoma, for distribution of the estate, and that it be adjudged that he was entitled to one-sixth thereof, was denied by that court. The case was then taken to the district court of Kay county, wherein the following findings were made on January 9, 1913:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Graves' Estate, In re
...of the entire instrument, no ambiguity or uncertainty is to be found in its language. See, e. g., the earlier case of Martin v. Martin, 93 Kan. 714, 145 P. 565, which holds: "When there is no ambiguity or uncertainty in the language used in the making of a will, a construction of the will i......
-
Reynolds' Estate, In re
...of the entire instrument, no ambiguity or uncertainty is to be found in its language. See, e. g., the earlier case of Martin v. Martin, 93 Kan. 714, 145 P. 565, which holds: 'When there is no ambiguity or uncertainty in the language used in the making of a will, no construction of the will ......
-
Meyer v. Rogers
...real estate located within this state. As bearing on the general proposition see McLean v. McLean, 92 Kan. 326, 140 P. 847; Martin v. Martin, 93 Kan. 714, 145 P. 565; Hanson v. Hoffman, 150 Kan. 121, 91 P.2d 31; Singer v. Wilson, 151 Kan. 621, 100 P.2d 985; and G.S.1949, All other contentio......
-
Goetz v. Goetz
...there is no necessity for construction, and in that event the will is to be enforced in accordance with its provisions (Martin v. Martin, 93 Kan. 714, 145 P. 565). Where construction is necessary, the intention of the testator must be gathered from all portions of the instrument, and that i......