Cheney v. Plumb
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Green Palee County. This is an action for the construction of a will, the terms of which are stated in the opinion. Some of the next of kin to’ the deceased seek to obtain distributive shares of her estate, claiming that the will does not dispose of the whole thereof.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Green Palee County. This is an action for the construction of a will, the terms of which are stated in the opinion. Some of the next of kin to’ the deceased seek to obtain distributive shares of her estate, claiming that the will does not dispose of the whole thereof. From a judgment that such will did dispose of the whole of the estate, and give the remainder, after the payment of debts, legacies, and expenses, to Oheney and wife as residuary legacies and devisees, the next of kin appeal. They took the ground that the language of the will shows an intent to…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, C. J.
To our minds, the meaning of the will in question presents no difficulty, and we think the learned circuit court gave it the right construction. That court held that the testatrix intended to dispose of and did dispose of her whole estate, and that she gave the plaintiffs John B. Cheney and wife the residue and remainder of her estate as their own property. Ingenious and specious objections can, of course, be suggested to this interpretation of the will, but they appear to us more plausible than sound.
It seems the estate of the testatrix amounted to nine or ten thousand dollars, consisting…
2Cited by11 opinions
- McQuarrie v. KuttlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- In re Will of TinsleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
- In Re Lidston's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1949
- Gilman v. GilmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Ironside v. IronsideSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.