Roberts v. Roberts

California Court of Appeal Jun 17, 1960 No. Civ. No. 24206Published

Before: Bishop

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the testator's will and codicils, when read as a whole, bequeathed the testator's savings bank deposits to his widow, and that the trial court erred in limiting that bequest to only one specific bank account.

Issues

Whether the testator's will and codicils, when read together, bequeathed all savings bank deposits to the widow or only a specific account.
Whether the trial court erred in its interpretation of the testator's intent regarding the distribution of bank accounts and notes.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“By the will, as interpreted by the codicils, the widow of the testator was to receive, either as a joint tenant, or by the will, not only the testator’s personal effects, but also the three bank accounts”

BISHOP, J. pro tem.* The problem presented by this appeal is the interpretation to be given a home-made will as affected by two do-it-yourself codicils. In its order deter[8]mining heirship the trial court decreed that the widow of the testator, the appellant, was bequeathed property constituting only a small part of the estate; that the rest should be divided equally among the five children of testator and a former, deceased, wife. We are reversing the order to enable the trial court to correct it in one particular.

To understand the dispute, we should have certain provisions of the will and parts of the codicils before us. These suffice: “It is my desire that I be buried beside my beloved wife Ima Chillson Roberts. . . .

“The family has purchased nine (9) new lots in a group in Glen Haven Cemetery, two of which have been reserved for myself and Ima Chillson Roberts. She, having pre-deceased me, will be moved to the new lot in Glen Haven Cemetery.

“Article Two:

“I declare that I have re-married, July 30, 1948, to Virginia Lee Conway, a widow, and that I have five (5) living children: Horace Dow Roberts, son; Paul Crandall Roberts, son; Dorothy Ellen Boekker, a daughter; Sydney Viola Lurcott, a daughter; and Jean Joyce Sheldon, a daughter; who shall share equally in my estate acquired previous to my marriage to Virgian Lee Conway, all of which was community property to which I obtained title by joint tenancy after Ima Chillson Roberts’ death.

“Article Three:

“To Virginia Lee Roberts, my present wife, I leave all my personal effects, consisting of home furnishings, silverware, paintings and objects of art, bric-a-brac, and whatever of value in our present home now at 4916 Colfax Avenue, North Hollywood, California. Also, I leave to Virginia Lee Roberts, all cash deposits in savings bank, all stocks and bonds, which I may possess at my demise.

“Article Four:

“All of the rest, and residue of my estate of whatsoever kind and whatsoever situate, I give, devise and bequeath in equal shares to my said five (5) children. ...”

To the will, witnessed April 3, 1954, the testator fashioned a codicil in his own handwriting beginning: “Oct. 30th 1956 ... I Arch. W. Roberts . . . desire to make a codicil to my will . . . .” His name appears nowhere else in this codicil, but this was sufficient. (Estate of Glass (1958), 165 Cal.App.2d 380, 384 [331 P.2d 1045, 1048], which cited

Roberts v. Roberts

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief