Scharkofsky v. Landfear, Admr.

197 N.E. 810, 50 Ohio App. 213, 19 Ohio Law. Abs. 208, 3 Ohio Op. 48, 1935 Ohio App. LEXIS 446
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 15, 1935
DocketNo 14677
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 197 N.E. 810 (Scharkofsky v. Landfear, Admr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Scharkofsky v. Landfear, Admr., 197 N.E. 810, 50 Ohio App. 213, 19 Ohio Law. Abs. 208, 3 Ohio Op. 48, 1935 Ohio App. LEXIS 446 (Ohio Ct. App. 1935).

Opinion

*210 OPINION

By LIEGHLEY, PJ.

Does the language of Item VIII of said will above quoted operate to foreclose the right of the widow to claim under §10509- 54 GC?

The administrator de bonis non claims she is barred by the conditions imposed on her in the will by the testator. The widow contends that she is entitled to this exemption by law, notwithstanding the conditions imposed by the will, and entitled to the same whether her deceased husband died testate or intestate.

Sec 10509-54 GC provides as follows:

“When a person dies leaving a surviving spouse, or minor child or children, the following property if selected as hereinafter provided, shall not be deemed assets or administered as such, but must be included and stated in the inventory of the estate; household goods, live stock, tools, implements, utensils, wearing apparel of the deceased and relics and heirlooms of the family and of the deceased, ornaments, pictures and books, to be selected by such living spouse, or if there be no surviving spouse, then by the guardian or next friend of such minor child or children, not exceeding in value twenty percentum of the appraised value of the property, real and personal, comprised in the inventory, but in no event is the value of the property not deemed assets to be more than twenty-five hundred dollars, if there be a surviving spouse, nor more than one thousand dollars if there be no surviving spouse, but surviving’ minor child or children, nor less than five hundred dollars in either case if there be so much comprised in the inventory and selected as herein provided; or, if the personal property so selected as herein provided, then such surviving spouse, guardian or next friend shall receive such sum of money as shall equal the difference between the value of the personal property so selected and such amount, arid such sum of money shall be a charge on all property, real and personal, belonging to the estate, prior to the claims of all unsecured creditors of the deceased or of the estate.”

It should be especially noted that by the provisions of the above section, which is entitled “Property exempt from administration,” the articles selected are not to be deemed assets of the estate or administered as such, but shall be included and stated in the inventory of the estate. Also, that if there be only five hundred dollars inventoried and selected, it is all exempt.

Comparing this section with former §10654 GC, it appears that the only substantial difference is the increase in the amount of exemption. It may be that this increase was intended to compensate for some of the items of dower abolished by the enactment of §10502-1 GC. Although the amount was increased, it nevertheless remains the exemption statute.

Unless inhibited by the terms of a will the surviving spouse is entitled by the statutes to a year’s support, the use of the mansion house for a year and the exemption to which our attention is directed.

Sec 10509-74 GC provides that the appraisers shall set off and allow to the widow and children under fifteen years of age provisions or other property to support them for twelve months, if needed. This allowance is a preferred debt of the estate next to the funeral expenses, expense of last sickness and administration expense. §10509-121 GC.

Sec 10509-79 GC gives the use of the mansion house free of charge for one year except in the event of sale prior thereto, in which event the surviving spouse shall be compensated by the payment to her of the fair rental value for the unexpired term, which compensation- receives the same priority in payment of debts as the year’s allowance.

The statutes clearly make the year’s allowance and the value of the use of the mansion house preferred debts against the estate and to be paid out of the estate.

The exemption allowed by §10509-54 GC is not by statute classified as a debt, but on the contrary set aside as an exemption to the surviving spouse and expressly directs that the same shall not be a part of the estate or administered as such.

However, where one dies leaving a will, a slightly different situation is presented, but a situation the legislature had under consideration and about which it enacted legislation. §10504-61 GC reads as follow:s:

“If the surviving spouse elects to take under the will, such spouse shall be thereby barred of all right to an intestate share of the estate, and shall take under the will *211 alone, unless it plainly appears from the will that the provision therein for the spouse was intended to be in addition to an intestate share. But an election to take under the will does not bar the right to remain in the mansion of the deceased consort or the widow to receive one year’s allowance for the support of herself and children, as provided by law, unless the will expressly otherwise directs.”

Observe that an election to take under the will bars the surviving spouse of all right to an intestate share of the estate unless the will clearly discloses an intention to add to the intestate share. Also, that an election does not bar the right to the use of the mansion house or the year’s allowance unless the will expressly otherwise directs. Also, it is. singularly significant that reference to the right of the surviving spouse to the exemptions provided for in §10509-54 GC was conspicuously omitted from the items that may be expressly barred by the testator.

There is some significance also to the time limits for the respective proceedings and steps to be taken in the administration of the estate of a decedent as set forth in §10508 GC and succeeding sections.

An inventory and appraisal are required one month after the appointment of the executor or administrator unless the court extends the time. Hearing on the approval of the inventory is set for one month thereafter. This inventory is required to contain enumeration of the specific articles selected by the surviving spouse, or the amount of money in lieu thereof in whole or in part. It should also include the amount fixed by the appraisers for year’s support.

- Repeating, the amount allowed for year’s support and the value of the use of the mansion house of which the surviving spouse is deprived by sale are made liens and are debts of the estate with priority over all general creditors by statute and by decisions. Watts v State, 38 Oh St 481-491.

This exemption is nowhere denominated a debt of the estate. This is probably on the theory that possession of the specific articles are turned over to the widow at the time of selection. In order to make certain that the surviving spouse receives this exemption, to the extent only that the exemption is made up of cash is the same made a charge on all property real and personal belonging to the estate prior to the claims of all unsecured creditors. Right and title to this exemption date from the death of the testator. Dane v Wick, 14 Oh St, 505.

If the selection be made within the articles and amount allowed by statute, right of possession of the specific articles selected dates from the time of selection or certainly from the time of the filing and approval of the inventory by the court.

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

Related

Jacobsen v. Cleveland Trust Co.
217 N.E.2d 262 (Lake County Court of Common Pleas, 1965)
Bankers Trust Company v. Allen
135 N.W.2d 607 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
197 N.E. 810, 50 Ohio App. 213, 19 Ohio Law. Abs. 208, 3 Ohio Op. 48, 1935 Ohio App. LEXIS 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scharkofsky-v-landfear-admr-ohioctapp-1935.