Taylor v. Minor
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 86 — PETITION EQUIT V APPEAL FROM MARION CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The judgment in the will case is conclusive as to the costs of that litigation. '2. The expenses allowed appellees in this case were incurred for their own personal benefit, and not to uphold, hut to defeat the will.
Read the full summary
Case 86 — PETITION EQUIT V APPEAL FROM MARION CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The judgment in the will case is conclusive as to the costs of that litigation. '2. The expenses allowed appellees in this case were incurred for their own personal benefit, and not to uphold, hut to defeat the will. They should not, therefore, be paid -out of the estate. 3. The curatrix ought not to pay interest on the funds while in bank, nor after she was ordered to collect and hold the same for distribution, unless she received interest,,or could reasonably have obtained it. "1. The heirs were joint tenants,,or tenants in…
1Opinion of the Court
■CHIEE JUSTICE HOLT
delivered the opinion of the court.
Bannister Taylor died in 1876, leaving a paper, pur-. porting to be liis will, executed • in 1844. It devised liis estate to liis widow,-the appellant, E. W. Taylor, for life, .or during lier widowhood; disinherited his •daughter, the appellee, Martha Minor, who had married J. C. Minor; provided that his widow, as his other children married or arrived at age, should give to each of them one thousand dollars as an advancement; but if any one of them married against her will, such child should have no part of his estate, and that upon the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Phillips' ex'r v. Phillips' adm'rCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1883
3Cited by36 opinions
- Howe v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Fargo Gas & Coke Co. v. Fargo Gas & Electric Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Dodd v. . AndersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Leigh v. GreenNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
- Hecht v. MetzlerUtah Supreme Court · 1897
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.