Keeley v. Wignall

California Court of Appeal Jul 23, 1947 No. Civ. No. 15775Published

Before: Shinn

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the testatrix intended the contingent provisions of her will, which provided for the distribution of bequests to the surviving spouse of a beneficiary who predeceased the distribution of the estate, to apply to the residuary estate bequeathed to her brother. Consequently, the appellant, as the surviving spouse of the brother, was entitled to the residuary estate.

Issues

Whether the contingent provisions of the will, which provided for the distribution of bequests to the surviving spouse of a beneficiary who did not survive the distribution of the estate, applied to the residuary estate bequeathed to the testatrix's brother.
Whether the appellant was estopped from appealing the decree of distribution by accepting a portion of the residuary estate as an assignee of other beneficiaries.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The persons named herein are to receive the bequests set forth provided they survive distribution of the estate.”

“We conclude that appellant is entitled to take the residuary estate.”

“The judgment is reversed with instructions to distribute the residuary estate to appellant.”

SHINN, Acting P. J. This is an appeal by Ada C. Wignall, surviving wife of Alonzo Charles Wignall, brother of deceased, Edith Alberta Wignall, from a decree of distribution. Appellant’s contention is that under the will of Edith she, Ada, was entitled to take the residuary estate which had [959]been left to decedent’s brother Alonzo, for the reason, as claimed by her, that it was the expressed intention of testatrix that she should take the same as the surviving wife of Alonzo.

The will declared testatrix to be a single person, named an executor, directed him to pay her debts, and provided as follows:

“Third: I direct my Executor to pay out of the residue of the estate, the following bequests subject to the following conditions:

“The persons named herein are to receive the bequests set forth provided they survive distribution of the estate. This provision is applicable to each person named as though the same were repeated after each person’s name. In the event they do not survive distribution, the bequests are to be paid to their surviving issue and if no issue survive, then to the surviving spouse. Subject to the said provision, I direct my Executor to pay the sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) to each of my cousins, whose names and addresses are as follows:

“Arthur H. Linaker, Los Angeles, California.

“Earl Wilkinson, Clinton, Iowa.

“Fourth: The sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) to Annie W. Dingee of San Diego, California.

“Fifth: The sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) to Ada C. Wignall, wife of my brother, Alonzo Charles Wignall.

‘1 Sixth : I give, devise and bequeath the following personal property to the following persons:

“Books to Earl Wilkinson, Clinton, Iowa.

“Haviland China Tea set to Mrs. Willard Webber, 1530 Grand View Avenue, Glendale, California.

“Beleek tea set consisting of one tray, four cups and saucers, tea pot, sugar bowl and cream pitcher, to Josephine Shepherd, Hawthorne Farm, Libertyville, Illinois.

“Oil paintings and drawings done by my mother; also family portraits, to George H. Linaker, McGee, Arkansas.

Keeley v. Wignall

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief