Reinders v. Koppelman
Decision Date | 05 March 1888 |
Citation | 7 S.W. 288,94 Mo. 338 |
Parties | REINDERS v. KOPPELMAN et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
A testator gave his wife a life-estate in all his property, remainder in fee, one-half to his adopted daughter, and the other half "to the nearest and lawful heirs of mine and that of my wife, share and share alike." At the time of the execution of the will and the death of the testator, he and his wife each had brothers and sisters living. The wife afterwards married and adopted a son of this last husband by a former wife, as her heir. Held, that such adopted heir was entitled to no interest under the will, but that the brothers and sisters of the testator's wife, or their representatives, are "the nearest and lawful heirs" within the meaning of the testator.
Appeal from St. Louis circuit court; AMOS M. THAYER, Judge.
Action for a partition of real estate, instituted by August Reinders, the appellant, as guardian of Otto W. Reinders, against John G. Koppelman and others, respondents. All the parties claimed an interest in the land through the will of John H. Koppelman, deceased, the said Otto W. Reinders claiming as the adopted heir of Anna M. Reinders, the widow of the testator.
Boyle, Adams & McKeighan and C. E. Gibson, for appellant. Leo Rassieur and Dexter Tiffany, for respondents.
Appeal from a decree of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, in a suit for partition of certain real estate, of which one John H. Koppleman died seized. The question for consideration arises upon the construction of the fourth item in the will of said Koppelman, dated May 7, 1869, the second, third, and fourth items of which are as follows:
Koppelman, the testator, died in 1869. Afterwards, in the year 1874, his widow, the said Anna, married one August Reinders, father of the appellant, Otto W. Reinders, by a former wife. Koppelman never had any children by the said Anna, nor has she ever had any by Reinders, and her age precludes the possibility of her having any issue in the future. At the time of the execution of the will and the death of the testator, the said Koppelman and wife each had brothers and sisters living. On the 4th of January, 1882, the said Anna, in accordance with the provisions of Rev. St. 1879, c. 15, p. 96, adopted her husband's son, the said Otto W. Reinders, as her heir, who claims that he is the "nearest and lawful heir," of the said Anna, within the meaning of the fourth item of said will, and as such is entitled, if he survives the said Anna, to one-fourth interest in remainder of the proceeds of the real estate sold in this suit, being one-half of the one-half of the remainder that was, under the provisions of said fourth item of the will, to go to "the nearest and lawful heirs" of the testator and of his said wife, share and share alike. The respondents claim, and the court below so held, that the said Otto W. Reinders had no interest, contingent or otherwise, in said land or the proceeds of the sale thereof under the decree, but, on the contrary, that the brothers and sisters of the said Anna, or their legal representatives, are "the nearest and lawful heirs" of said Anna within the meaning of the testator in his said will. The appellant contends that the decision of this court in Reinders v. Koppelmann, 68 Mo. 482, in which this same will was before the court, is decisive of the question, and, in support of his contention, quotes the following extract from the opinion in that case: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Graves v. Graves
...320 Mo. 543, 8 S.W. (2d) 1008; Armour v. Frey, 226 Mo. 646, 126 S.W. 483; Cornet v. Cornet, 248 Mo. 184, 154 S.W. 121; Reinders v. Koppelman, 94 Mo. 338, 7 S.W. 288; Small v. Field, 102 Mo. 104, 14 S.W. 815; Allison's Executor v. Chaney, 63 Mo. 279; Cross v. Hoch, 149 Mo. 325, 50 S.W. 786; ......
-
Evans v. Rankin
..."heirs" has been construed in some cases to mean collateral heirs, such as brothers and sisters and their descendants. [Reinders v. Koppelman, 94 Mo. 338, 7 S.W. 288 (excluding an adopted child); Philadelphia Trust Safe Deposit & Insurance Co. v. Isaac (Pa.), 31 Atl. 651; Woodward v. James ......
-
Robert v. Mercantile Trust Co.
...v. Baptist Board, 232 Ill. 606; 1 Page on Wills, sec. 810. (b) In case of doubt the beneficiary nearest in kinship is favored. Reinders v. Koppelman, 94 Mo. 338; Baker v. Baker, 152 Ill. App. 620; Turner's Estate, 5 Pa. Dist. Ct. 285; Russell v. Furness, 145 N.Y. Supp. 402; In Re Hoyt, 160 ......
-
Hockaday v. Lynn
...will go to his blood relations, and not to his relations by adoption. It's a poor rule, won't work both ways. In Reinders v. Koppelman, 94 Mo. 338, 7 S.W. 288, it held, in effect, that the phrase "nearest and lawful heirs of my said wife" did not include an adopted daughter of said wife. Af......