Shank v. Wilson

• Citation: 74 P. 812,33 Wash. 612
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Washington
• Decision Date: 29 December 1903
• Parties: SHANK et al. v. WILSON.

74 P. 812

33 Wash. 612

SHANK et al. v. WILSON.

Supreme Court of Washington

December 29, 1903

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Boyd J. Tallman, Judge.

Proceeding by Capen Shank and others against Ethel A. Wilson administratrix, to set aside a decree of distribution. From an adverse judgment, petitioners appeal. Affirmed.

Frank C. Park, for appellants.

John E. Humphries and Harrison Bostwick, for respondent.

DUNBAR J.

Edwin B. Shank died intestate, leaving property of the value of about $11,000, which property was distributed to respondent his widow, by the decree of final distribution. Appellants who are heirs of the deceased, petitioned to set aside the final decree, and asked that one-half of the property be distributed to them, for the reason that it was acquired by deceased before his marriage to respondent on June 4, 1900 and was his separate property. All the facts set forth in the petition as grounds for opening the decree of distribution were admitted, but the date of the marriage was contested. The copies of the record of the court of King county having probate jurisdiction were introduced, showing a ceremonial marriage between respondent and deceased at Tacoma on June 4 1900, and the judgment decreed the marriage at that time. Upon the introduction of this record the appellants rested, whereupon the respondent introduced testimony tending to show that the respondent and deceased had lived and cohabited together for many years prior thereto, and were so living in 1894, prior to the acquisition of the property, and that they constantly held themselves out as such husband and wife. The material question in this case, upon which the appeal is based, is the date of marriage. It is insisted by the appellants that there was no sufficient showing of a holding out by the respondent and the deceased as husband and wife, or of their living and cohabiting together as husband and wife. But, without entering into a circumstantial analysis of the testimony in this regard, we think it is ample to sustain the finding of the court. The testimony shows without any doubt that these parties lived together as man and wife, introduced each other to their friends and neighbors as man and wife, visited with friends in that capacity, and were so generally understood to be, for many years prior to this death, in the states of Idaho, Missouri, and Washington, and in British Columbia. It is well-established law, not...