Bell v. Brittain

893 P.2d 251, 257 Kan. 407
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedApril 21, 1995
Docket70,604, 71,001
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 893 P.2d 251 (Bell v. Brittain) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bell v. Brittain, 893 P.2d 251, 257 Kan. 407 (kan 1995).

Opinion

257 Kan. 407 (1995)

TERRILL WALTER BELL, CHRISTOPHER MARK BELL, PATRICK JAMES BELL, and MICHAEL BRUCE BELL, Appellees,
v.
BYRON BRITTAIN, individually and in his capacities as succeeding trustee of the Thomas W. Howerton Revocable Trust and as executor of the estate of Thomas W. Howerton; MAURINE RUTSCHMAN; and FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, INC., NEWTON, KANSAS, a Kansas nonprofit corporation, Appellants.

Nos. 70,604, 71,001

Supreme Court of Kansas.

Opinion filed April 21, 1995.

Gregory C. Nye, of Nye & Nye, of Newton, argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellants.

John T. Steere, of Fleeson, Gooing, Coulson & Kitch, L.L.C., of Wichita, argued the cause, and Lyndon W. Vix and Timothy P. O'Sullivan, of the same firm, were with him on the briefs for appellees.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The opinion of the court was

ALLEGRUCCI, J.:

Byron Brittain, Maurine Rutschman, and First United Methodist Church, Inc., of Newton, appellants, appealed the granting of summary judgment in favor of the appellees on the grounds that the joint and mutual will executed in 1985 by Thomas W. and Ruby Ethel Howerton was contractual, that Thomas breached the contractual will by executing a new will after Ruby Ethel's death, and that all property in the Thomas W. Howerton Revocable Trust was subject to the 1985 will. In a published opinion by Judge Brazil, the Court of Appeals affirmed the district court. Bell v. Brittain, 19 Kan. App.2d 1073, 880 P.2d 289 (1994).

We have reviewed the briefs, arguments, and the record in this case, and we conclude the Court of Appeals was correct. We adopt the opinion of the Court of Appeals and affirm both the district court and the Court of Appeals.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re the Estate of Milward
73 P.3d 155 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
893 P.2d 251, 257 Kan. 407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-brittain-kan-1995.