Lindner v. Ehrich

143 S.W. 778, 147 Ky. 85, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 193
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedFebruary 22, 1912
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 143 S.W. 778 (Lindner v. Ehrich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lindner v. Ehrich, 143 S.W. 778, 147 Ky. 85, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 193 (Ky. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Lassing —

Affirming

> Anthony Martin died in 1880, leaving a wife and two children. His daughter, Anne, Married one Ehrich, by [86]*86whom she had two children, and from whom she was divorced. Decedent, by his will, which was probated shortly after his death, placed all of his property in the hapds of a trustee, to be held by him for the benefit of his wife and two children, and any children they might have, as hereinafter set out. The trustee never qualified, but the family retained the property and rented it out until 1894, when the widow died. . Thereafter "William took charge of the property named in the will in which his father wanted him to have a life estate, and Mrs. Ehrich took charge of hers, and they have so since held and used it.

One of Mrs. Ehrich’s children died during her infancy, leaving no issue. The other married Greorge Lindner, and thereafter died, leaving one child, Anne Rose Lindner. The income realized from the property so held by Mfrs. Ehrich was all consumed in the payment of her living expenses. The taxes accumulated thereon, until there was more than a thousand dollars owing, and the property was sold for these taxes. In order to save what she could and prevent the property being a total loss, she instituted a suit "in the Jefferson Circuit Court, wherein she sought to have a construction of the will of her father and a sale of such interest in the property as it should be determined she took thereunder. She made her infant granddaughter a defendant. She likewise made parties defendant her brother, and all those who under any condition or contingency provided for in the will might by any possibility inherit any part of the estate. None of the defendants answered or made any defense except the guardian ad litem for the infant, who was appointed by the court to represent the infant defendant, Anne Rose Lindner, and certain other infant defendants. Upon consideration the chancellor was of opinion, and so held, that the plaintiff, under the will of her father, took a life estate in the property in question, and that her children took the fee, and one of them-having died in infancy, without issue, she inherited that portion thereof belonging to such child. . So that he adjudged her to be the owner of one-half of the remainder in fee in addition to her life estate in the entire property. The other one-half interest in the remainder in fee was adjudged to her granddaughter, A.nne Rose Lindner. The property was adjudged indivisible and ordered sold, the infant’s interest therein to remain a lien upon the property. The guardian ad litem, appar[87]*87ently more for the purposes of perfecting title than with the object of procuring a reversal of that judgment, has prosecuted this appeal.

The will and its several codicils are as follows:

“Louisville, Aug. 7, 1868.

“The following I publish as my last will and testament hereby revoking all former wills by me made.

“1st. Its my wish that at my death I be buried in a decent Christian manner in front of my tombstone in my lot in the Methodist burial ground in the city of Louisville leaving enough room for my wife at my side and my daughter at our side and my son on the other and that my executor pay all my just debts and legal liabilities.

“2nd. At my death I wish my executor to have all my personal property of every kind appraised except such as is hereinafter specifically devised and after appraisement allow my wife and each of my children to take such of said articles as they may desire at the appraised value and the balance of said personal property be sold at such time as my executor may deem best.

3rd. I have heretofore advanced to my daughter, Anne, and her husband two thousand dollars with which I wish her charged and I desire to make my children ns nearly equal as possible in the distribution of my estate and therefore in the distribution of my personal estate, including many notes and other property, wish my son made equal with her before she receive anything more from my estate.

“éth. I hereby will to my friend and brother, John T. Wood, in trust, the following property, the house and lot whereon I now live on the north S of Broadway bet. 8 & 9 Streets in the city of ‘Louisville commencing 50 ft. W. of the N. W. corner of Eighth Street leaving a front of 50 ft. on Broadway and extending back N. the same width to an alley with all the improvements thereon, also a lot of ground on the W. side of Eighth St. commencing at a point one hundred and eighteen feet north of Broadway'thence with the West line of Eighth Street to the alley leaving a front on Eighth St. of about 61 ft. together with all the improvements thereon to bé held by him, the said John T. Wood, in trust' for the sole use and benefit of my daughter, Anne Ehrich, during her life and after her death to be held in trust for the use and benefit of her' child or children that she may have the [88]*88rents, profits and issues to be paid' as hereinafter directed.

“5th. I will to my friend and .brother John T. Wood in trust be held by him as hereinafter directed a lot of ground on the east side of Eighth street in the city of Louisville between Broadway and York Streets having a front on 8th street of 60 ft. and extending back the same width 200 ft. to an alley together with all improvements thereon also my little farm in Jefferson County near the fair grounds known as the McGrinnis farm containing about 17 acres with all improvements to be held by him in trust for the sole use and benefit of my son William T. Martin during his life and after his death to be held by him in trust for the sole use and benefit any child or children that he may have the rents issues aud profits arising from said trust property to be paid as hereinafter directed.

“6th. At my decease I wish and hereby direct my executor after making sale of my personal estate as directed in the 2nd clause of this will to keep all my estate together such as is herein specifically devised and such of my household furniture as may be taken by my wife and children under the 2nd clause of this will including that devised in the 4th and 5th clauses of this will during my wife’s lifetime and loan out the money or invest the same in bonds or stocks at his- discretion and rent out the real estate including that devised in the 4th and 5th clauses of this will and after paying taxes insnrance and all repairs that may be necessary in his discretion to keep the houses in good repair he is to pay my wife 1-3 of the net amount received from the interest rents, etc., the other 2-3 to be held by him for the exclusive and sole use and benefit of my daughter Anne and my son William as herein provided.

“7th. It is my-will that my executor whilst he has possession of my estate as directed under the 6th clause of this will pay to my daughter Anne Ehrich the 1-3 of the net proceeds of the income as she may need it to live on during her life and her receipt to him for the same shall be sufficient but in no state of case is it to be paid to her husband or any one else on her order or assignment or transfer but to be paid to her in person.

“8th. The third of the net income derived from my estate whilst in my executor’s hands under -the provisions of 6th clause.,of this will going to my son I wish held by my executor until he arrives at the age of 21 [89]*89years or the death of my wife. If my wife shall survive until my son attains the age of 21 yrs.

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

Related

Maher v. Maher
154 F. Supp. 804 (E.D. Kentucky, 1957)
Ford v. Yost
190 S.W.2d 21 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1945)
Ligget v. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co.
118 S.W.2d 720 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1938)
Chenoweth v. Bullitt
6 S.W.2d 1061 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1928)
Cammack v. Allen
250 S.W. 963 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
143 S.W. 778, 147 Ky. 85, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lindner-v-ehrich-kyctapp-1912.