Urey's Adm'r v. Urey's Ex'x
Decision Date | 01 December 1887 |
Citation | 86 Ky. 354,5 S.W. 859 |
Parties | UREY'S ADM'R and others v. UREY'S EX'X and others. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Caldwell county.
Wm Marble and C. T. Allen, for appellants.
F. W Darby, for appellees.
F. W Urey, born in Ireland, but a naturalized citizen of the United States, died in the town of Princeton, where he had resided for many years, leaving a last will and testament that was admitted to probate in the Caldwell county court, his wife, Pencia Urey, qualifying as executrix. His death took place in July, 1864, and his widow, the executrix, took charge of his estate, and now holds and claims it as her own under certain provisions of the testator's will. The testator left no children surviving him, but brothers and sisters and their decendants, his father and mother having died long prior to his death. He was the owner at his death of considerable estate, consisting of land, bank stock, money, choses in action, etc.,--all of which has been in the possession of his widow since the probate of his will in August, 1865. The judgment of the county court declaring the paper in question to be the last will of Urey was never appealed from, modified, or reversed. This will consists of an original paper dated the twenty-ninth of March, 1859, and a codicil attached thereto on the same paper, dated April 10, 1860. The will and codicil seem to have been executed in the manner prescribed by the statute. In the year 1884 the widow sold certain parcels of the land devised to her, as she claims, by her husband; and, the purchasers questioning her title, this action in equity was instituted in the court below, seeking a construction of the will, to which the heirs at law of the testator as well as the devisees were made defendants.
The will is as follows:
The heirs at law of the testator maintain that, as the effect or validity of the instrument as a will is made to depend on the contingency of both the testator and his wife dying while on their eastern trip, and both having returned, the writing became a nullity, and the whole estate descended to them as his next of kin, subject to the widow's dower and distributive share of the personalty. The legatees insist that the paper is the last will of the decedent, and the widow took either a life-estate, or became entitled to the residuum of the estate after the various devises or legacies have been satisfied. The widow claims the entire estate under the twelfth clause of the will.
Such are the different constructions placed on the will of the testator by the parties in interest; and if, as contended the original will was based on a contingency that never happened, and cannot be revived, or made effectual by a codicil attached thereto, then the heirs at law take the property subject to the rights of the widow as dowress and distributee. The probate of the will disposes of the question as to its validity, and it must be construed as the...
To continue reading
Request your trial- St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Kern
-
First Trust Co. v. Myers
... ... v. Ensley et al., ... 105 Tenn. 107, 58 S.W. 288; Urey's Admr' et al ... v. Urey's Ex'x et al., 86 Ky. 354, 5 S.W. 859 ... (2) The ... ...
- Watkins v. Bennett
-
The First Trust Co. and Hedgpeth v. Myers et al.
...In re Donges Estate, 103 Wis. 497, 79 N.W. 786; Ensley et al. v. Ensley et al., 105 Tenn. 107, 58 S.W. 288; Urey's Admr' et al. v. Urey's Ex'x et al., 86 Ky. 354, 5 S.W. 859. (2) The only cases in which Missouri courts give consideration to claims of defendants for allowances to cover their......