Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

settlementprobatewilldivorce
settlementdefendantappealtestimonywill

Related Cases

Darr v. Billeaudeau, 2018 Ark. App. 16, 541 S.W.3d 460
View Case »
In re Girard’s Estate, 386 Pa. 548, 127 A.2d 287
View Case »
Matter of Bonjean’s Estate, 90 Ill.App.3d 582, 413 N.E.2d 205, 45 Ill.Dec. 872
View Case »
Brunner v. Brown, 480 N.W.2d 33
View Case »
Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149, 98 S.Ct. 1729, 56 L.Ed.2d 185, 23 UCC Rep.Serv. 1105
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Crist v. Nesbit, 352 S.W.2d 53

Facts

James W. Nesbit died on April 28, 1959, shortly after executing a will on April 27, 1959, which named his wife, Anna Ottolene Nesbit, as entitled to a portion of his estate. A property settlement agreement was executed on the same day, indicating that Anna was contemplating divorce. However, no divorce occurred, and the will was admitted to probate. The executor sought to clarify the distribution of the estate, leading to the current dispute regarding Anna's entitlements under the will versus the property settlement.

The facts are not in dispute. James W. Nesbit died on April 28, 1959. He executed a will on April 20, 1959. Seven days later he executed a new will.

Issue

Did the Will of James W. Nesbit, deceased, give his surviving spouse, Anna Ottolene, anything? If so, what did it give her? Does the property settlement entered into between them on April 27, 1959, estop the surviving spouse from claiming under the Will?

This case presents two questions, viz.: I. Did the Will of James W. Nesbit, deceased, give his surviving spouse, Anna Ottolene, anything. If so, what did it give her? II. Does the property settlement entered into between them on April 27, 1959, estop the surviving spouse from claiming under the Will?

Rule

Under Missouri law, a surviving spouse has the right to elect to take against the will, but if no such election is made, they are entitled to the benefits provided in the will. A property settlement does not revoke the rights granted in a will unless explicitly stated.

Under the provisions of Section 474.160, V.A.M.S., a surviving spouse has the right and privilege to elect to take against the Will of her deceased spouse, but Mrs. Nesbit did not make any such election.

Analysis

The court analyzed the language of the will and determined that it clearly intended to provide Anna with certain rights, including exempt property and a year's maintenance. The court emphasized that the property settlement agreement could not alter the rights granted by the testator in the will, as there was no divorce that would trigger a revocation of those rights.

The Will is short and there is no ambiguity whatsoever in it. It is the established rule that the court must determine the intention of the testator from the four corners of the Will, as expressed in the Will, and not from the testimony of the scrivener, that the testator said he didn't want his wife to have any of his estate.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the lower court's judgment, ruling that Anna Ottolene Nesbit was entitled to her rights under the will, and the property settlement did not prevent her from claiming those rights.

The judgment is affirmed. All concur.

Who won?

Anna Ottolene Nesbit prevailed in the case because the court found that her rights under the will were intact and not affected by the property settlement agreement.

Defendants, Harry Combs Saunders and Thelma Saunders, have appealed from said judgment.

You must be