Ray's Estate, In re, No. 2660

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
Writing for the CourtBLUME; RINER, C. J., and HARNSBERGER
Citation287 P.2d 629,74 Wyo. 317
PartiesIn the Matter of the ESTATE of Carl RAY, Deceased. Robert E. BARRINGER, Objector, Petitioner and Appellant, v. Ida Angelot RAY and Paul Angelillo, Executors under the Last Will and Testament of Carl Ray, deceased, and Ida Angelot Ray, Individually, and as Guardian ad litem of Carlita Naney Ray, a Minor, Respondents.
Docket NumberNo. 2660
Decision Date13 September 1955

Page 629

287 P.2d 629
74 Wyo. 317
In the Matter of the ESTATE of Carl RAY, Deceased.
Robert E. BARRINGER, Objector, Petitioner and Appellant,
v.
Ida Angelot RAY and Paul Angelillo, Executors under the Last Will and Testament of Carl Ray, deceased, and Ida Angelot Ray, Individually, and as Guardian ad litem of Carlita Naney Ray, a Minor, Respondents.
No. 2660.
Supreme Court of Wyoming.
Sept. 13, 1955.

Page 630

[74 Wyo. 319] Hawkins & Cannon, Las Vegas, Nev., Clyde M. Watts, Lathrop & Lathrop Cheyenne, L. O. Hawkins, Las Vegas, Nev., and Carleton A. Lathrop, Cheyenne, for objector, petitioner and appellant.

Loomis, Lazear & Wilson, Donald M. Starnes, Clarence A. Swainson and John U. Loomis, Cheyenne, for respondents.

[74 Wyo. 321] BLUME, Justice.

This proceeding involves principally the question whether or not one Robert E. Barringer, called the petitioner herein, is an heir and entitled to a portion of the property in this state of Carl Ray, deceased.

The record discloses the following facts: Carl Ray under the name of Melvin A. Barringer was married on September 1, 1901. The petitioner, Robert E. Barringer,[74 Wyo. 322] was born of this marriage on June 18, 1902, in Chicago, Illinois. Shortly after his marriage and prior to the birth of the petitioner herein, decedent was confined in the Missouri state penitentiary where he remained until 1906. During his period of confinement, his then wife secured a divorce. Following his release he visited his former wife on several occasions and he saw petitioner Robert E. Barringer five or six times after that up to 1930. The last contact between the two was by telephone in 1946.

After Melvin A. Barringer was released from the penitentiary he went west and changed his name to Carl Ray. In 1943, he met his present widow Ida Angelot Ray, hereafter referred to as the widow, and courted her continuously for a number of years and married her on May 8, 1946. Prior to the marriage and on April 19, 1946, he and his present widow entered into a prenuptial agreement. The substance of this was that Carl Ray should make and keep in existence a valid will wherein and whereby the property would be bequeathed to a trustee and the will should pvovide that Ida Angelot Ray should receive one-half of the net proceeds of the trust estate. After the marriage of the parties, they adopted a child named Carlita Nancy Ray. On April 22, 1949, the decedent made a will in which he declared that he was a resident of Las Vegas, Nevada; that he was a married man; that his wife was Ida Angelot Ray and that at the time of making the will he had one child living named Carlita Nancy Ray who was then about 25 months of age. He gave a few bequests to some relatives in the amount of approximately $6,000. He left the balance of the property in trust to last for 20 years.

Page 631

He provided that $100 per month should be paid to his nephew Truman Nye; $100 per month to his adopted daughter; and $500 per month to his widow. After 20 years, the property was left to his widow and adopted daughter. He appointed [74 Wyo. 323] his wife Ida Angelot Ray, Cyril Wengert and Paul Johnson as trustees under his will. It appears that Paul Johnson has died since that time. Paragraph tenth of the will provides:

'If any devisee, legatee or beneficiary under this Will, or any person claiming under or through any devisee, legatee, or beneficiary, or any other person who, if I died wholly or partially intestate, would be entitled to share in my estate, shall, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, contest this Will or attack, oppose or in any manner seek to impair or invalidate any provision hereof, or shall, in any manner whatsover, conspire to cooperate with any person or persons attempting to do any of the acts or things aforesaid, or shall settle or compromise, directly or indirectly, either in or out of court, with any such contestant, or shall acquiesce in or fail to oppose such proceedings, or shall endeavor to succeed to any part of my estate, otherwise than through this Will, then in each of the above mentioned cases I hereby bequeath to such person or persons the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) only, and all other bequests, devises and interests in this Will given to such person or persons shall be forefeited and shall be distributed pro rata among such of my devisees, legatees and beneficiaries as shall not in any manner have participated in, and as shall have opposed such acts or proceedings.'

Carl Ray died on July 21, 1949, and his last will and testament was duly admitted to probate in the Superior Court of Los Angeles county, California, on August 23, 1949, and in Las Vegas, Clark county, Nevada, on October 17, 1949, and in Laramie county, Wyoming, on November 13, 1950. In Laramie county, Wyoming, he left theatre property properly known as the Princess Theatre in Cheyenne, Wyoming, which is described as the fractional part of lots 1 and 2, block 391, in the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming. He also left a professional building in Las Vegas, Nevada, and a home in Los Angeles, California. Pursuant to a petition on the part of the petitioner herein, filed in the district court of [74 Wyo. 324] Clerk county, Nevada, at Las Vegas, he was declared to be the owner of one-third of the property of the decedent by reason of the fact that he had been omitted in the will of the decedent but that said omission was not intentional. The decision of the probate court in Las Vegas, Nevada, was appealed to the Supreme Court of Nevada and the decision of the lower court was affirmed on June 27, 1952. In re Ray's Estate, 69 Nev. 204, 245 P.2d 990.

It appears thereafter that Ida Angelot Ray, widow of decedent, brought an action in the courts of Nevada to enforce the prenuptial agreement. Thereafter an order was made in the district court of the state of Nevada to the effect that, because the widow had brought the foregoing action to enforce the prenuptial agreement, she was deprived of any rights under the will of the decedent except $1 and that all sums theretofore paid to the widow as widow's allowance should be returned to the executors of the estate.

After various proceedings were had in the district court of Laramie county, Wyoming, in connection with the estate of the decedent, the executors on June 30, 1952, filed a final account, alleging that all debts of the estate had been paid except certain commissions and except attorneys' fees, and asked that these be allowed. They also alleged that Paul Johnson, one of the trustees under the will of decedent, had died, and asked that the remaining property be distributed to the remaining trustees, to wit, Ida Angelot Ray and Cyril Wengert, and that the report be approved. On July 10, 1952, petitioner Robert E. Barringer filed his objections to the report. He alleged that he is a son of Carl Ray, deceased, as determined by the decision and order of the court of the state of Nevada made on November 22, 1950; that he was then declared to be the owner of one-third of the estate of decedent; that the widow

Page 632

appealed [74 Wyo. 325] to the Supreme Court of Nevada but that the decision of the district court was affirmed by that court; that thereafter the widow commenced an action to enforce the prenuptial agreement heretofore mentioned; that the district court of Nevada thereafter determined that by reason of the commencement of that action the widow was entitled to $1 and no more and that the family allowance paid her should be returned to the executors. Petitioner asked that he be declared by the court to be the owner of one-third of the estate of decedent; that the money paid to the widow as family allowance be returned to the executors and that she be declared to have no interest in the estate except as mentioned in paragraph tenth of the will of decedent. Certified copies of the various judgments of the Nevada courts were attached.

Ida Angelot Ray and Paul Angelillo, executors of the estate, as well as the widow and adopted daughter, filed separate exceptions to the objections of the petitioner, alleging in substance that the petitioner is not interested in the estate, and has no right to file objections; that none of the objections are valid; that the fact that petitioner has no interest in the estate is res judicata by reason of prior proceedings in the court. This matter of res judicata will be mentioned and set out more fully hereafter.

The foregoing matter came on for hearing before the district court of Laramie, county, Wyoming, apparently on February 3, 1954. Some testimony was adduced. Certified copies of the judgments of the Nevada courts were introduced and admitted in evidence. By order of February 9, 1954, the court directed that the decree admitting the will to probate be amended to show that the decedent was a resident of Las Vegas, Nevada. On the same day an order was made and entered overruling objections made to the family allowance theretofore[74 Wyo. 326] made, and dismissing the exceptions and objections of Robert E. Barringer, petitioner herein. On April 5, 1954, a further order was made and entered approving the final account of the executors, showing that all debts have been paid, except amounts due the executors and attorneys, and allowing the executors the sum of $2,017.42, Donald Starnes the same amount, and $300 to Clarence A. Swainson for services as attorney rendered by them. The court also distributed the remainder of the estate of the decedent in this state to the surviving trustees under the will, to wit, Ida Angelot Ray and Cyril Wengert. From these orders the petitioner Robert E. Barringer has appealed to this court.

The record shows that decedent's widow has no property of her own. The situation then confronting us is briefly this: The Nevada courts held that the petitioner was entitled to one-third of the estate of the decedent. As a result the widow consulted counsel, and upon his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • Harrington's Estate, Matter of, No. 5606
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • July 22, 1982
    ...and look to this court only for direction in the distribution of estate assets located in Wyoming. They rely on In Re Ray's Estate, 74 Wyo. 317, 287 P.2d 629 (1955) which held that the devolution of real property in this state and the effect of the decedent's will must be determined by the ......
  • Keesecker v. Bird, No. 23386
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • July 14, 1997
    ...Every state has plenary jurisdiction and control of the property, real and personal, located within its borders. In re Ray's Estate, 74 Wyo. 317, 330, 287 P.2d 629, 634 (1955), quoting In re Smith's Estate, 55 Wyo. 181, 200, 97 P.2d 677, 684 We therefore hold that the choice of law doctrine......
  • Moncrief v. Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., No. 93-CV-1045-B.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Wyoming
    • March 10, 1995
    ...Powell II Unit are interests in rem and the Wyoming probate court therefore has exclusive jurisdiction thereof. See In re Ray's Estate, 287 P.2d 629, 634 (Wyo. 1955) (adopting doctrine of lex loci rei sitae, the law of the place where the subject matter is located governs) and Wyo.Stat. Sec......
  • Ore-Ida Potato Products, Inc. v. United Pac. Ins. Co., ORE-IDA
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • April 30, 1964
    ...only to a subject within its jurisdiction, and the words, 'in Oregon', if not expressed, are necessarily implied. In re Ray's Estate, 74 Wyo. 317, 287 P.2d 629 Swift & Company v. Peterson, 192 Or. 97, 233 P.2d 216 (1951), held that the [87 Idaho 195] only livestock amenable to Oregon's stat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • Harrington's Estate, Matter of, No. 5606
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • July 22, 1982
    ...and look to this court only for direction in the distribution of estate assets located in Wyoming. They rely on In Re Ray's Estate, 74 Wyo. 317, 287 P.2d 629 (1955) which held that the devolution of real property in this state and the effect of the decedent's will must be determined by the ......
  • Keesecker v. Bird, No. 23386
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • July 14, 1997
    ...Every state has plenary jurisdiction and control of the property, real and personal, located within its borders. In re Ray's Estate, 74 Wyo. 317, 330, 287 P.2d 629, 634 (1955), quoting In re Smith's Estate, 55 Wyo. 181, 200, 97 P.2d 677, 684 We therefore hold that the choice of law doctrine......
  • Moncrief v. Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., No. 93-CV-1045-B.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Wyoming
    • March 10, 1995
    ...Powell II Unit are interests in rem and the Wyoming probate court therefore has exclusive jurisdiction thereof. See In re Ray's Estate, 287 P.2d 629, 634 (Wyo. 1955) (adopting doctrine of lex loci rei sitae, the law of the place where the subject matter is located governs) and Wyo.Stat. Sec......
  • Ore-Ida Potato Products, Inc. v. United Pac. Ins. Co., ORE-IDA
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • April 30, 1964
    ...only to a subject within its jurisdiction, and the words, 'in Oregon', if not expressed, are necessarily implied. In re Ray's Estate, 74 Wyo. 317, 287 P.2d 629 Swift & Company v. Peterson, 192 Or. 97, 233 P.2d 216 (1951), held that the [87 Idaho 195] only livestock amenable to Oregon's stat......
  • 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