Lanterman v. La Fetra

WHITE, J.,

pro tem.

Stella B. La Fetra died testate November 9, 1933. Through the medium of a holographic will the testatrix made several specific bequests, after which follows the following provision in the will:

‘1 Sixth—The remainder of my estate I wish equally divided among the living nieces and nephews—children of my husband's brothers and sister and my brother’s children allowing C. W. La Fetra a nephew’s portion.

Personal property 1 give to Harriet Lula Lloyd <& Frank Lanterman—division to be made by F. D. & R. 8. Lanterman. What no one wants give to

charity—”

The trial court found that the italicized portion of the will above quoted was interlined by the testatrix.

[601]

The present controversy centers about the interpretation to be given to the italicized portion of the foregoing provision. Appellants herein, together with Harriet Lanterman, are the consanguineous nephews and nieces of testatrix. Two of them, Frank and Lloyd Lanterman, petitioned the superior court for an order determining heirship, wherein it should be decreed that all of the personal property be distributed to them except an amount sufficient to administer the estate, it being provided in the will that “a sufficient amount to administer my estate to be taken from stocks and bonds standing in my name”. Sixteen nieces and nephews of the deceased husband of testatrix filed objections to said petition, contending that by the aforementioned words in controversy here it was the intention of the testatrix to give to the four consanguineous nephews and nieces

only her personal effects.

The trial court found in favor of the objectors, and decreed that it was the intention of the testatrix to give only the

personal effects

to Harriet Lula Lloyd and Frank Lanterman, and that after paying the specific bequests provided for in the will, the remainder of the estate, subject to the costs of administration, be distributed in equal shares among the appellants and the remaining sixteen nieces and nephews From such order this appeal is prosecuted.