Wolf v. Uhlemann

• Decision Date: 20 April 1927
• Docket Number: No. 17849.,17849.
• Citation: 325 Ill. 165,156 N.E. 334
• Parties: WOLF et al. v. UHLEMANN et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

325 Ill. 165

156 N.E. 334

WOLF et al.

v.UHLEMANN et al.

No. 17849.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 20, 1927.

Suit by Fred W. Wolf, Jr., by his guardian, and another, against Anna Louise Uhlemann, the Northern Trust Company, and another. From the decree, defendant last named appeals.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Superior Court, Cook County; Oscar Hebel, Judge.

Scott, Bancroft, Martin & MacLeish, of Chicago (John E. MacLeish, Charles M. Price, and Fred Schroeder, Jr., all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellant.

Everett L. Millard, of Chicago, guardian, for appellee Fred W. Wolf, Jr.

Walter D. Hawk, of Chicago, for appellee Ann Wolf Loftus.

McNab, Holmes & Long and Louis J. Behan, all of Chicago (Samuel S. Holmes, of Chicago, of counsel), for other appellees.

FARMER, J.

This is an appeal prosecuted by the Northern Trust Company, as trustee under the will of Anna A. Wolf, deceased, from a decree of the superior court of Cook county entered September 11, 1926, approving a family settlement agreement and authorizing the execution thereof by the guardian of the minor grandchild, who is a beneficiary under the will.

The bill in this case was filed in July, 1926, by Ann Wolf Loftus and Fred W. Wolf, Jr., a minor, by his guardian. They were the only living grandchildren of the testatrix. Anna Uhlemann and Fred W. Wolf, the only living children of the testatrix, with their respective spouses, and the Northern Trust Company, trustee under the will of Anna A. Wolf, were made defendants. The bill alleged that Anna A. Wolf died during January, 1923, leaving a will executed in November, 1913, and two codicils thereto, executed in 1920 and 1921. Copies of the will and codicils were attached to the bill. The will and codicils were admitted to probate in January, 1923, letters testamentary were issued to the Northern Trust Company, as executor, and the estate was duly administered upon. The executor was discharged in June, 1925, and thereafter continued as trustee of the estate under the provisions of the will. The personal estate of the testatrix was valued at approximately $1,400,000 and the value of the real estate approximately $400,000. The personal estate consisted chiefly of cash, mortgage notes, stocks, bonds, etc., and the real estate of various parcels of land, with improvements thereon, located in Cook county, Ill. The net annual income from the real and personal property belonging to the estate was in excess of $60,000.

The bill also set out the substance of certain provisions of the will providing, during a period of 21 years after the testatrix's death, for an annuity to the testatrix's daughter and son, for the care and education of the grandchildren of the testatrix, and also for an annuity to each grandchild after such grandchild had reached the age of 21 years. The bill further alleged that Anna Uhlemann and Fred W. Wolf were the only children of testatrix at the time of her death; that the daughter was at that time 52 years of age, was married, and had had no children born to her; that the son was 44 years of age when his mother died, was married, and had two living children, who are the complainants in the bill. Ann Wolf (now Ann Wolf Loftus) at the time of the death of her grandmother was 19 years of age, and Fred W. Wolf, Jr., then 12 years of age. The bill further alleged that the parties named in the bill as complainants and defendants are the only living persons who have any right, title, or interest in and to the property and estate of the testatrix; that the Northern Trust Company, as trustee, had paid over to the four beneficiaries, under the terms of the will of the testatrix, approximately $63,000, and that there remained in the possession of the trustee, as accumulated income from the estate, approximately $175,000. The bill further alleged that complainants' aunt and father have prepared their bill of complaint asking for the construction of the will and codicils of the testatrix, and have threatened, and now threaten, to file said bill in a court of chancery seeking the construction thereof; that the parties charge that because of ambiguity, uncertainty, and indefiniteness the will and codicils thereto were null and void, and that as the only living children and descendants of the testatrix the aunt and father are entitled, as next of kin and heirs at law, to the ownership of all the property and estate of the testatrix; that Anna Uhlemann and Fred W. Wolf claim that doubts and uncertainties had arisen as to what disposition was to be made of the net income arising from the personal property and real estate held by the trustee under the will in excess of the sums specifically provided by the first codicil and in subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) of paragraph 2 of article 2 of the will, to whom the same was to be paid, or as to whether the same was to be accumulated, and if to be accumulated, for how long a period; that doubt existed as to the powers of the Northern Trust Company regarding the investment of the proceeds of sales of real estate, the investment of maturities, or disposition of personal property; also as to the power of the trustee to make sales of either real or personal property, as to whether there could be any cestui que trust within the term of 21 years next after the decease of the testatrix, and as to whether or not the provisions of the will regarding the disposition of the corpus of the estate are in violation of the rule against perpetuities, and, if so, the effect thereof upon the remaining provisions of the will. The bill further alleged that numerous discussions in regard to the controversies arising over the validity of the will had taken place between complainants, their agents and attorneys, and their aunt and father, and that such discussions had extended over a period of several months; that all of the parties having a beneficial interest in the estate had lived for many years in the same community, had always been harmonious and sympathetic in their family affairs, and were desirous of maintaining the same intimate family relations as had previously existed; that the respective parties, as a result of the controversies, had consulted counsel, and had been advised that there were serious questions with respect to the construction of the will and as to the validity of the will and codicils. It was also stated that the parties beneficially interested desired an amicable settlement and adjustment of the matters in controversy, and in the various discussions between the parties it was understood and agreed by and between all of the parties that the complainant Fred W. Wolf, Jr., a minor, stood in a similar relation in all the discussions, investigations, and controversies as did his sister, Ann Wolf Loftus and that such minor should be given every benefit arising from any discussion or negotiation; that as a result of these discussions and investigations Anna Uhlemann and Fred W. Wolf have had prepared and have submitted to complainants a draft of an agreement which they are willing to enter into with Ann Wolf Loftus, and with Fred W. Wolf, Jr., through his guardian, provided the court, after examination and consideration of the same, will authorize the execution of such an agreement by the guardian. The bill also alleged that the guardian had some doubt as to whether he would be authorized to execute such proposed agreement on behalf of his ward whereby the provisions thereof would be forever binding upon the infant, and that the guardian was unwilling to execute such an agreement without the authorization of the court; that it was the opinion of the guardian, who is an attorney at law, that serious doubts exist as to whether the proposed attack against the will could be successfully maintained, but that the same would result in protracted litigation, would perhaps result in delay as to the administration and distribution of the property of the estate, would involve large expenditures and expenses, and that such litigation would perhaps result in creating dissension among the relatives and members of the families; that the guardian had investigated the facts and circumstances involved in the controversy, and that from his investigation believed the proposed contract would be advantageous to his ward. The bill also alleged that Anna Uhlemann and Fred W. Wolf and their respective spouses are ready and willing to cooperate,so far as might be necessary, for the purpose of carrying out the proposed agreement, and that they and complainants were the only persons now in being who are or may be interested in the estate of the testatrix; that any descendants or issue of Anna Uhlemann or Fred W. Wolf who may hereafter come into being will stand in the same right as complainants, and that the rights and equities of any such descendants or issue will be protected and their claims concluded by decree rendered in this proceeding, and that for the purpose of class representation the present grandchildren, who are complainants, will represent all of the unborn persons who may hereafter come into being. The bill prayed that complainants may obtain the advice, instructions, and finding of the court in regard to the questions as to whether the proposed agreement was an advantageous one for the infant complainant, Fred W. Wolf, Jr., and his guardian, to enter into, and as to the powers and duties of the guardian; that if the agreement be found by the court to be advantageous, the court decree and authorize the execution thereof on the part of such infant, and in that event the agreement be carried out under the supervision, order, and direction of the court, and that the Northern Trust Company, as trustee, be authorized and directed to make the distributions and payments provided therein.

The defendants Anna Uhlemann and Fred W. Wolf and their respective spouses answered the bill of complaint, admitting the allegations therein and offering to enter into the proposed agreement...