Karl v. Gabel

48 Mo. App. 517, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 133
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 7, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 48 Mo. App. 517 (Karl v. Gabel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Karl v. Gabel, 48 Mo. App. 517, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 133 (Mo. Ct. App. 1892).

Opinion

Gill, J.

An old lady by the name- of Pauline Williams died at Kansas City, the owner of certain real estate and personal property. The plaintiff was her granddaughter and only descendant and heir-at-law. A few days before her death Mrs. Williams made a will by which she devised half of the real estate to defendant Gabel, and half thereof to the plaintiff, while • all the personal property was bequeathed to the defendant Gabel. After the formal probate of the will, the plaintiff brought this suit to set aside the will. On a trial in the circuit court the plaintiff succeeded," and the defendant brought the cause here by writ of error

[518]*518This is a case involving title to real estate, and,, therefore, under the provisions of the constitution, this, court has no jurisdiction. These litigants respectively lay claim to certain real estate, adversely to each other. If the paper in controversy is the last will of Mrs. Williams, then the defendant has title to certain real estate formerly owned by her. But, if the writing should be set aside and held to be no will, then the title to such real estate is lodged with the plaintiff. A final judgment in this case, therefore, will determine to which of these parties the title of the common source has been transmitted. Title to real estate is then involved in the suit. Dunn v. Miller, 18 Mo. App. 136; s. c., 96 Mo. 324; Baier v. Berberich, 77 Mo. 413.

The cause should, therefore, be transferred to the supreme court, and it is so ordered.

All concur.

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

Related

Proffer v. Proffer
114 S.W.2d 1035 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1938)
Burrier v. Jones
92 S.W.2d 885 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1936)
Bingaman v. Hannah
156 S.W. 496 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 Mo. App. 517, 1892 Mo. App. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/karl-v-gabel-moctapp-1892.