Estate of Hampton

California Court of Appeal Nov 18, 1958 No. Civ. 23144Published

Before: Fourt

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the probate court's interpretation of a holographic will, holding that a bequest to a legatee to "take what he wants and take care of the cat" was not an unlimited gift but was instead conditioned upon and limited by the responsibility of caring for the testatrix's cat.

Issues

Whether a holographic will provision granting a legatee the right to "take what he wants" constitutes an unlimited gift or is limited by the accompanying instruction to care for the testatrix's cat.
Whether the trial court erred in determining that the gift to the legatee was not intended to be substitutionary in the event the testatrix's husband predeceased her.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The provision for Don Hill is contained in one short sentence and is inextricably tied to the family cat.”

“It is impossible for us to conceive that she could have contemplated or intended that Don Hill would have an unlimited power to select whatever he might want from her estate.”

FOURT, J.

This is an appeal from a decree of the probate court determining interests in the estate of Florence M. Hampton, deceased.

The decedent Florence M. Hampton died on February 11, 1956, leaving a holographic will which was admitted to probate, and its provisions are set forth in their entirety, as follows:

“Los Angeles, Cal. Nov. 22, 1952

“To whom it may concern-

“This is my last will and testament. I will everything to my husband to do as he will and name him as executor. Don Hill is to take what he wants and take care of the eat.

“Two nieces, Louise Baker of 15 S. E. 9th St., Beaverton, Oregon, and Dora Conger of e/o John D. Heron, Topango.

“They may divide the contents of the furnishings peacefully.

“(Signed) Florence M. Hampton

“To my brother Melvin in Ukiah, Cal. my niece Mrs. Clifford Archer, Portland, Oreg. and my sister Louise Stevens the sum of one dollar also to my nephew Will Kittridge I leave one dollar. His wife might need it.”

Her husband, James Percy Hampton, died testate on or about December 24, 1955, thereby predeceasing testatrix approximately six weeks,

J. Donald Hampton, the brother of the deceased husband, filed a petition for decree determining interests in estate. A joint answer was filed on behalf of Don Hill as legatee and administrator c.t.a., Louise Baker, Dora Conger, Mrs. Clifford Archer and Will Kittridge, and separate statements of claim of interest in estate were filed by J. Donald Hampton, Marie Awbrey and Don Hill, and objections to the statement of claim of interest by Don Hill were filed on behalf of J. Donald Hampton.

The decree determining interests in estate included the following provisions:

“That the provision for Don Hill in said will was not intended to be substitutionary and that he takes the eat, if he or she be in existence, and such portion of the estate as. he may select and may be reasonably necessary to enable him

[257]

Estate of Hampton

AI Brief

FOURT, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief