Junkins v. Mulligan

California Supreme Court Jul 26, 1926 No. Docket No. S.F. 11810.Published

Before: Curtis

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the testatrix intended to bequeath one-third of her net estate, after the payment of debts and administration expenses, rather than one-third of the gross proceeds from the sale of her property.

Issues

Did the testatrix intend to bequeath one-third of the gross proceeds of the sale of her property, or one-third of the net estate after debts and expenses?
Does the bequest of 'proceeds' of a sale of property limit the beneficiary to only those specific funds if other assets exist in the estate?

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“it was the clear intention of said testatrix to bequeath to Rev. Patrick Mulligan one-third of her estate rather than one-third of the 'proceeds of the sale of the property of said estate.”

“By one-third of the estate, we, of course, mean one-third of the 'residue remaining in the hands of said executrix after the payment of the debts of said deceased and the expenses of administration.”

CURTIS, J.

Emma L. O’Neil Kirby died on the fifth day of May, 1924, leaving a last will and testament which was duly admitted to probate in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco. A portion of the third paragraph of said will reads as follows: ‘‘ 3rd. I hereby direct that all of the estate of which I may die seized or possessed be sold as soon as possible after my death, the proceeds of said sale I hereby devise and bequeath as follows: 1. One third (1/3) thereof to Rev. Patrick Mulligan of St. Joseph’s Church, San Francisco, California, to do with as he sees fit.” Then follows a bequest of $500 to Jessie Weigmore, a second bequest of $500 to Rev. Patrick Mulligan “for masses for the repose of my soul and the souls of the members of my family,” a bequest of $300 to Abbie Bone and finally all the rest and residue of the' estate to Maud Junkins, whom the testatrix appointed executrix of her will. At the time of her death the estate consisted of the sum of $20 in money and a parcel of improved real property situated in the city and county of San Francisco, which was subject to a mortgage given to secure the payment of a promissory note for $2,100. During the administration of the estate the executrix, prior to the sale of said real property, collected $869.50 in rents therefrom. The real property was sold by said executrix for $9,000 and after deducting the amount of the mortgage the estate received therefrom the sum of $6,900. The total amount of money, therefore, which came into the hands of said execu

[137]

trix was the sum of $7,789.50. The debts of said deceased and the expenses of administration amounted to $1,814.12, which, deducted from the total amount of money received by said executrix, left for distribution the sum of $5,975.38. This amount was distributed by the probate court as follows :

“To Rev. Patrick Mulligan...............$3,000.00

To Mrs. Jessie Weigmore........-....... 500.00

To Rev. Patrick Mulligan for masses for the repose of the soul of said deceased and for the repose of the souls of the

members of her family............... 500.00

To Abbie Bone......................... 300.00

Junkins v. Mulligan

AI Brief

CURTIS, J.

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief