Johnson v. Kirby

193 S.W. 1074, 1917 Tex. App. LEXIS 310
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 14, 1917
DocketNo. 5757.
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 193 S.W. 1074 (Johnson v. Kirby) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnson v. Kirby, 193 S.W. 1074, 1917 Tex. App. LEXIS 310 (Tex. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinions

Appellee objects to the consideration of appellant's brief, for the reason that the same is not in accordance with the rules. Should we strictly construe the rules, perhaps this objection would be sustained, but we prefer to decide the case upon its merits.

C. W. Gregory, of Hays county, Tex., made his last will and testament, from which we quote as follows:

"2. It is my will and desire that my beloved wife, F. E. Gregory, shall have all of my property, real, personal and mixed, wherever the same may be situated, both my separate property, if any, and all my right, title and interest in and to such community property as I may own in common with the said F. E. Gregory, to have and to hold the same and every part thereof to and for her sole and exclusive use and benefit, with full power to sell and convey, and dispose of the same, or any part thereof, as she may desire, and at any time, and in such manner, and upon such terms as she may elect, and with full power in the premises to convey the absolute fee simple title thereto: Provided, however that if, at the date of her death any of the specific property hereby bequeathed and *Page 1075 devised to her shall remain on hand, unsold and undisposed of, then, at her death, it is my will and desire that such property so remaining on hand shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions contained in the fourth paragraph of this instrument.

"3. It is my will and desire that she, the said F. E. Gregory, shall not only have the use of the specific property hereby bequeathed and devised for her own exclusive benefit, using, enjoying, appropriating and, if she shall desire, consuming the same, but it is also my will and desire that she shall in like manner use, enjoy, appropriate, and, if she shall so desire, consume for her own benefit, the proceeds arising from so much of said property as she shall, under the power hereby conferred, sell and convey, or otherwise dispose of; but if at her death, any of the proceeds arising from any such sale or other disposal of such property shall remain on hand, it is my will and desire that such remaining proceeds, at her death, be disposed of in accordance with the provisions contained in the fourth paragraph of this instrument.

"4. By the term `specific property,' as used in this instrument, I mean the whole or any part of the property hereby devised and bequeathed unto the said F. E. Gregory, and by the term `proceeds,' as used in this instrument, is meant the money or other thing, if any, received by her as the price of, or in exchange for, any of such property sold or disposed of by her, whether the thing so received be realty or personalty; and it is my will and desire that so much of the property hereby bequeathed and devised to her as may remain on hand at her death undisposed of, and so much of the proceeds of such sales as shall then remain on hand, undisposed of, and so much of the thing or things received in exchange for any of the property hereby bequeathed and devised as shall then remain on hand undisposed of, shall then go to trustees appointed by the Annual Conference called the West Texas Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the use and benefit of the Orphanage situated in the city of Waco, in the State of Texas, and which Orphanage is the same institution now superintended by the Rev. W. H. Vaughan; and it is my will and desire that the equitable title to such remaining and undisposed property be considered as hereby vested in such trustees for the use and benefit of said Orphanage: and I also request of the said F. E. Gregory that she take the necessary steps to clothe such trustees with the legal title thereto for such uses, but should she fail to do so, it is my will and desire that the equitable title thereto be considered as vested in such trustees for the uses aforesaid, under this will, immediately upon her death.

"5. I request the said F. E. Gregory, during her lifetime, to appropriate so much of the property or its proceeds hereby devised to her as in her discretion she shall deem sufficient and advisable for the object and purpose of providing for the support and maintenance of her sister, Cancadia Kirby.

"6. The sixth and last paragraph of the will appoints F. E. Gregory sole executrix of this will and provides that she shall be exempt from giving any bond as such executrix and exempted from the jurisdiction of the probate court, but shall be wholly an independent executrix."

Gregory died in 1901, and his will was duly probated. The estate of said Gregory at the time of his death consisted of a tract of land in the country, and the homestead in the town of San Marcos, all of which was community property of himself and wife. His wife, F. E. Gregory, sold the land in the country for the sum of $9,186.75 in the year 1906. She loaned the proceeds of this sale, faking notes, first in her own name, and subsequently in the name of appellee, delivering said notes to appellee; her reason therefor being that she intended said notes as a gift to appellee. On August 30, 1915, F. E. Gregory made, executed, and delivered to appellee a deed, conveying to her the town property, in consideration of $1, love and affection, and other considerations, not named, reserving the right to herself to occupy said property, and to receive the rents and revenues thereof during her lifetime. On September 9, 1915, F. E. Gregory made, executed, and delivered to appellee another deed, conveying to her all of her property, real, personal, and mixed, save and except only her own wearing apparel, the consideration expressed in said deed being love and affection, $1, and other considerations not named.

Appellee is the sister of F. E. Gregory, and is the person referred to in the fifth clause of the will above set out. She had resided with C. W. Gregory and wife since she was 6 years old to the death of said C. W. Gregory, and continued to reside with F. E. Gregory during her lifetime. Appellee was partially paralyzed. She had aided Gregory and wife in their household duties, and continued to render assistance to Mrs. Gregory during her lifetime, they being inseparable companions. Appellants herein are the trustees of the Orphanage mentioned in said will, and brought this suit to recover said town lots and the proceeds of the sale of the country land received by appellee, amounting to $6,500, the remainder of the proceeds of said land having been spent by Mrs. Gregory during her lifetime.

The issue here involved is as to whether or not Mrs. Gregory, under the provisions of said will, had the power to transfer said property and notes to appellee. We think the will conferred such power upon Mrs. Gregory. Hanna v. Ladewig, 73 Tex. 37, 11 S.W. 133; Feegles v. Slaughter,182 S.W. 10; Young v. Campbell, 175 S.W. 1100; King v. Bock, 80 Tex. 156,15 S.W. 804; Schuyler on Wills (5th Ed.) vol. 1, §§ 558, 565; 40 Cyc. 1610. Appellants cite McMurry v. Stanley, 69 Tex. 229, 6 S.W. 412, Flippen v. Robinson, 144 S.W. 707, and Littler v. Dielmann,48 Tex. Civ. App. 392, 106 S.W. 1137, as holding the contrary doctrine. These cases, except the latter, are distinguishable from the instant case, in that the property was not conveyed by the beneficiary during his lifetime. In McMurry v. Stanley, supra, the will in question contained the following clauses:

"Third.

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

Related

Dickerson v. Keller
521 S.W.2d 288 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Commercial Bank, Unincorporated, of Mason v. Satterwhite
413 S.W.2d 905 (Texas Supreme Court, 1967)
Anderson v. Kennon
353 S.W.2d 241 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1961)
Askey v. Mason
231 S.W.2d 551 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1950)
Harrell v. Hickman
215 S.W.2d 876 (Texas Supreme Court, 1948)
Maxwell v. Harrell
183 S.W.2d 577 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1944)
Taylor v. Harkey
145 S.W.2d 625 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1940)
Woodlief v. Clay
71 S.W.2d 600 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1934)
Norton v. Smith
227 S.W. 542 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
193 S.W. 1074, 1917 Tex. App. LEXIS 310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-kirby-texapp-1917.