State ex rel. Brisbin v. Frater

Decision Date21 October 1939
Docket Number27603.
Citation95 P.2d 27,1 Wn.2d 13
PartiesSTATE ex rel. BRISBIN v. FRATER, Judge.
CourtWashington Supreme Court

Original certiorari proceeding by the State, on the relation of Ernest R. Brisbin, against the Honorable John A. Frater, judge of the superior court for King county, to review an order of the superior court for King county admitting a will to probate.

Cause remanded to superior court with directions.

Chester A. Lesh, of Seattle (H. L. Maury and A. G. Shone, both of Butte, Mont., of counsel), for relator.

Rummens & Griffin, of Seattle, for respondent.

BLAKE Chief Justice.

This cause comes up on certiorari to review an order of the superior court of King county admitting a will to probate.

Lilly Belle Moore died in King county leaving a will in which her sister Candice Angel, a resident of King county, was named as executrix. The will, which was executed in 1935, was entrusted to the custody of George H. Rummens who, by petition setting up all facts necessary to confer jurisdiction, presented it for probate. When the petition offering the will for probate came on for hearing, two sisters of the deceased, who were beneficiaries under the will, and the relator filed objections on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction to admit the will to probate.

The substance of the objections was that the deceased left no property in King county and was not, at the time of her death and never had been, a resident of the state of Washington. It was stated in the objections that Mrs. Moore's domicile had always been in Silver Bow county, Montana, and that all property of which she died possessed was there situated; that she was an invalid and mentally incompetent; that, although she had been living with her sister in Seattle for four years, she was merely a sojourner in this state. The court declined to hear evidence in support of the objections and entered the order admitting the will to probate.

In this, we think the court erred. For, the objectors were entitled to be heard under Rem.Rev.Stat. § 1418, which provides: 'Any person interested in a will may file objections in writing to the granting of letters testamentary to the persons named as executors, or any of them, and the objection shall be heard and determined by the court.'

The procedure followed by the relator has the approval of this court. State ex rel. Karney v. Superior Court, 143 Wash. 358, 255 P. 376.

It is argued, in support of the order, that, under the admitted facts, Mrs. Moore had her 'place of abode' in King county at the time of her death; that, by reason of that fact, the superior court of that county acquired jurisdiction of her estate under the terms of Rem.Rev.Stat. § 1376, which provides:

'Wills shall be proved and letters testamentary or of administration shall be granted:
'(1) In the county of which deceased was a resident or had his place of abode at the tim of his death. * * *' (Italics supplied.)

We do not think this argument is sound. Notwithstanding the use of the phrase ' or had his place of abode,' we do not think the statute can be construed so as to confer upon a superior court jurisdiction of the estate of one dying within its territorial jurisdiction but all of whose property and whose domicile are in another state.

There are two well recognized prerequisites to the jurisdiction of a court to issue letters testamentary or of administration. The first, of course, is death of the person on whose estate letters are to be granted. The second is an alternative: (a) The person must at the time of death reside within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, or (b) leave property therein upon which administration may be had....

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Breese's Estate, In re
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • November 21, 1957
    ...it must be shown that he left property within the jurisdiction of the court upon which administration may be had. State ex rel. Brisbin v. Frater, 1 Wash.2d 13, 95 P.2d 27. A cause of action is an asset sufficient to give the court jurisdiction. Lund v. Seattle, 163 Wash. 254, 1 P.2d 301; I......
  • In re Lassin's Estate, 30723.
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1949
    ... ... The court directed that the petition be ... amended to so state ... While ... in Alaska and prior to his death, ... 213, 115 P. 88, Ann.Cas.1912D, 395; State ex rel. Brisbin ... v. Frater, 1 Wash.2d 13, 95 P.2d 27, and cases there ... ...
  • Smith's Estate, In re
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • April 7, 1953
    ...34; In re Gifford's Will, 279 N.Y. 470, 18 N.E.2d 663, 664-666; Shenton v. Abbott, 178 Md. 526, 15 A.2d 906, 908; State ex rel. Brisbin v. Frater, 1 Wash.2d 13, 95 P.2d 27, 28; State ex rel. Duckworth v. District Court, 107 Mont. 97, 102, 80 P.2d 367, 369. Administration in the state where ......
  • Gordon v. Seattle-First Nat. Bank
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • January 28, 1957
    ...183 Wash. 503, 48 P.2d 924, where the same circumstances were present and the same procedure was followed.' In State ex rel. Brisbin v. Frater, 1 Wash.2d 13, 95 P.2d 27, we held that, where two sisters of the deceased filed objections to the admission of her will for probate in King county,......
2 books & journal articles
  • Chapter A. Establishing The Will
    • United States
    • Washington State Bar Association Washington Law of Wills and Intestate Succession (WSBA) Chapter 9
    • Invalid date
    ...of death or leave property in the state. In re Breese's Estate, 51 Wn.2d 302, 304, 317 P.2d 1055 (1957); State ex rel. Brisbin v. Frater, 1 Wn.2d 13, 15, 95P.2d 27 43 Wash. Const, art. IV, §6; RCW 11.96A.040; State ex rel. Keasal v. Superior Court, 76 Wash. 291, 298-304, 136 P. 147 (1913); ......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • Washington State Bar Association Washington Law of Wills and Intestate Succession (WSBA) Table Of Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...U.S. 953 (1965): 27 State v. Mora, 110 Wn. App. 850, 43 P.3d 38, review denied, 147 Wn.2d 1021 (2002): 316 State ex rel. Brisbin v. Frater, 1 Wn.2d 13, 95 P.2d 27 (1939): 372, 373, 374 State ex rel. Dep't of Ecology v. Anderson, 94 Wn.2d 727, 620 P.2d 76 (1980): 391 State ex rel. Everett Tr......

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