Yocum v. Siler
Decision Date | 19 February 1901 |
Citation | 61 S.W. 208,160 Mo. 281 |
Parties | YOCUM et al. v. SILER et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
A testator bequeathed certain lands to his son absolutely, with the express reservation that, if "my son dies without legal issue, descendants of his, legitimate issue of his, said lands shall pass to" certain nieces and sisters in equal parts. When the will took effect, Rev. St. 1845, c. 32, § 2, declared that the words "heirs and assigns" were not necessary to create a fee simple. Estates tail were abolished by section 5, which provided that thereafter, where, by any conveyance or devise, the grantee should be seised of an estate which would have been held an estate tail, under St. 13 Edw. I., every such conveyance should vest only a life estate in the grantee, and on his death the remainder should go to his children; but section 6 directed that the words "dying without is-due" meant issue living at the death of the ancestor named, thus preventing the creation of estates tail by implication; and section 47 of the chapter on wills (Rev. St. 1879, § 4004) declared that in all devises in which the words "heirs and assigns" are omitted, and no expressions are contained in the will whereby it shall appear that the devise was intended to convey a life estate only, and no further devise is made to take effect after the death of the devisee, it shall be understood to be the intention of the testator to devise an estate in fee simple. Held that, as the son had legitimate issue living at his death, he took a fee simple, in the absence of express words showing an intent to give him only a life estate.
In banc. Appeal from circuit court, Platte county; William S. Herndon, Judge.
Action by Oscar Yocum and others against Susan Siler and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
The following is the opinion in division No. 2 (SHERWOOD, J.):
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Middleton v. Dudding
...67 L. R. A. 97, 105 Am. St. Rep. 471; Roth v. Rauschenbusch, 173 Mo. loc. cit. 586, 73 S. W. 664, 61 L. R. A. 455; Yocum v. Siler, 160 Mo. loc. cit. 288, 61 S. W. 208; Kelly v. Hogan, 71 App. Div. 343, 76 N. Y. Supp. 5; Trustees v. Harris, 62 Conn. 93, 25 Atl. 456. The two rules are simply ......
-
Cornet v. Cornet
...S. W. 471; Roberts v. Crume, 173 Mo. 572, 73 S. W. 662; Roth v. Rauschenbusch, 173 Mo. 582, 73 S. W. 664, 61 L. R. A. 455; Yocum v. Siler, 160 Mo. 281, 61 S. W. 208; Nichols v. Boswell, 103 Mo. 151, 15 S. W. 343; Small v. Field, 102 Mo. 104, 14 S. W. 815; Chew v. Keller, 100 Mo. 362, 13 S. ......
-
Barnhardt v. McGrew
...in the land, subject to be divested should one of said children die leaving no descendants. Collier v. Archer, 258 Mo. 383; Yocum v. Siler, 160 Mo. 281; Gannon v. Allbright, 183 Mo. 238; Gannon v. Pauk, 200 Mo. 75; Brown v. Tuschoff, 235 Mo. 449; Owens v. Men & Millions Movement, 296 Mo. 11......
-
Gannon v. Albright
...conveyed the land, their issue, the plaintiffs, have no interest in the land and can not recover. G. S. 1866, p. 442, sec. 5; Yocum v. Siler, 160 Mo. 281; McRee Means, 34 Ala. 349; Newsom v. Holesapple, 101 Ala. 682; Couch v. Gorham, 1 Conn. 36; Alfred v. Marks, 49 Conn. 473; Morgan v. Morg......