Elam v. Phariss
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — How. Joseph D. Perldns, Judge. (1) The power of a married woman to make a will devising land is not absolute and unconditional. It is “subject to the rights of the husband, if any, to his curtesy therein.” Sec. 536, R. S. 1909. (2) Presumptions as to facts always take flight upon the appearance of the facts themselves.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — How. Joseph D. Perldns, Judge. (1) The power of a married woman to make a will devising land is not absolute and unconditional. It is “subject to the rights of the husband, if any, to his curtesy therein.” Sec. 536, R. S. 1909. (2) Presumptions as to facts always take flight upon the appearance of the facts themselves. Brown v. Brown, 237 Mo. 668. (3) “Gross inequality in the dispositions of the property, where no reason for it is suggested, either in the will, or otherwise, may change the burden, and require explanation on the part of those who support the…
1Opinion of the CourtJames T. Blair, J.
This is a will contest. There was a verdict upholding the will, and judgment was rendered accordingly. Appellant and respondents Nathaniel Merle Wheat and Edith Phariss are the children and heirs at law of testatrix. Respondent N. M. Wheat is her surviving husband, and he and respondent Elliott are the executors under the will.
By the will testatrix devised (1) to her son three lots and parts of two other lots in Aurora and a one-half interest in a tract near the city — all_ subject to a life estate in N. M. Wheat, the husband; (2) to her daughter Edith Phariss one parcel in fee simple, and a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bradford v. BlossomSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Cowan v. ShaverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
3Cited by3 opinions
- Union Planters National Bank of Memphis v. InmanCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1979
- In Re Estate of BurtSupreme Court of Vermont · 1961
- Leonard v. StantonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1944