Singer v. Taylor
| Decision Date | 10 January 1914 |
| Docket Number | No 18,304,18,304 |
| Citation | 137 P. 931,91 Kan. 190 |
| Parties | SALLIE C. SINGER, Appellant, v. J. LUTHER TAYLOR et al., as Individuals and as Executors, etc., Appellees |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided January, 1914
Appeal from Crawford district court; ANDREW J. CURRAN, judge. Opinion on motion to allow costs and attorneys' fees filed January 10, 1914. Motion allowed. (For original opinion, see 90 Kan. 285, 133 P. 841.)
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
1. COSTS--Equitable Apportionment. In an action other than for the recovery of money only or for the recovery of specific real or personal property the court, in its discretion, may tax costs and apportion the same between the parties as, in its discretion, it may think right and equitable.
2. SAME--Construction of Will--Allowance of Attorneys' Fees to Both Parties. Where there is ambiguity in the provisions of a will and a real controversy as to its construction it is competent for the court to allow reasonable attorneys' fees out of the estate to the defeated as well as the successful party.
F. B Wheeler, C. S. Denison, O. T. Boaz, L. W. Johnson, all of Pittsburg, and G. L. Dunn, of Topeka, for the appellant; R W. Blair, B. W. Scandrett, and C. A. Magaw, all of Topeka, of counsel.
Nelson Case, of Oswego, John J. Campbell, of Pittsburg, and B. S. Gaitskill, of Girard, for the appellees.
This motion involves the question of whether costs and attorneys' fees shall be allowed to the unsuccessful party out of the estate of the testator. In this case the will of Joseph I. Taylor, which disposed of a large estate, was held to be valid and one of its provisions was construed. A daughter, Sallie C. Singer, contested the validity of the will on the ground that it was the result of undue influence. She also alleged that a certain provision in it was ineffectual to transfer a large part of the estate and, at least, that part of the property must be divided according to the laws of descents and distributions. In defendants' answer they denied the averments that undue influence had been exercised upon the testator, and then asked for an interpretation of the will and a determination that it disposed of the entire estate of the testator. On these issues a trial was had and the contentions of the defendants were sustained. (Singer v. Taylor, 90 Kan. 285, 133 P. 841.)
The greater part of the testimony in the case related to the contest of the will, but there was a substantial controversy between the parties as to the interpretation of one of its important provisions and in both courts serious consideration was given to this controversy. As the action is not one for the recovery of money only or specific real and personal property costs are not allowed as of course to the prevailing party, but the court may assess the costs as, in its discretion, it may think right and equitable. (Civ. Code §§ 613, 615.) An equitable proceeding for the construction of a will is peculiarly a case that appeals to the discretion of a court, and where there is an ambiguity in the will and a real question of interpretation the court is justified in not only assessing the costs of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Troy Bank & Trust Co. v. Brantley, 4 Div. 767
...was upheld in both the trial and appellate courts and attorneys' fees out of the estate were awarded the petitioner. In Singer v. Taylor, 91 Kan. 190, 137 P. 931, the daughter of the deceased contested the will on the grounds of undue influence, and also asserted that a certain clause was i......
-
Clarksdale Hospital v. Wallis
...In re Eatley's will, 89 A. 776; In re Gordon's will, 111 A. 610; Succession of Beauregard, 49 La. Ann. 250, 22 So. 348; Singer v. Taylor, 91 Kan. 190, 137 P. 931; et al. v. Haire et al., 197 S.W. 678, Ann. Cas., 1916D, 529; Everson v. Hearne (Neb.), 131 N.W. 1130; Beer et al. v. Squires et ......
-
Trautz v. Lemp
...v. Guerin, 270 Ill. 239, 110 N.E. 402; Ingraham v. Ingraham, 169 Ill. 432; Merrill v. Winchester, 120 Me. 203, 113 A. 261; Senger v. Taylor, 91 Kan. 190, 137 P. 931; Beer v. Squires, 102 Conn. 503, 129 A. 382; Cooke v. Women's Medical College, 82 N.J.Eq. 179, 87 A. 131; and Reed v. Creamer,......
-
Baldwin v. Hambleton
...In re Estate of Walton [183 Kan. 238, 243, 326 P.2d 264] supra; In re Estate of Reynolds, 176 Kan. 254, 270 P.2d 229; Singer v. Taylor, 91 Kan. 190, 137 P. 931; and Hurst v. Weaver, 75 Kan. 758, 763, 90 P. 297.)' (p. 86, 340 P.2d p. 917.) (Emphasis 'See, also, Central Trust Co. v. Harris, 1......