Bemis v. Stearns
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a petition for partition of the real estate of Samuel Steams, deceased, intestate; the petitioners being the daughters, and the respondents the sons, of the deceased ; and it was entered in this Court at this term, being the same process which was referred to in the case of Stearns fy Al. vs. Stearns &f Al. [Ante, page 167.] The respondents, in their plea in bar to the petition, [ *201 ] * allege substantially, that advancements were made by the intestate to the…
Read the full summary
This was a petition for partition of the real estate of Samuel Steams, deceased, intestate; the petitioners being the daughters, and the respondents the sons, of the deceased ; and it was entered in this Court at this term, being the same process which was referred to in the case of Stearns fy Al. vs. Stearns &f Al. [Ante, page 167.] The respondents, in their plea in bar to the petition, [ *201 ] * allege substantially, that advancements were made by the intestate to the several female heirs, in whose right Ine petition was instituted; and they infer, as matter of law, that there can be no…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
We think the replication is sufficient in point of form; and the general question in the case is, whether the fact “verred of there being a surplus of personal estate, sufficient, after paying debts and charges, to leave a distributive share to each of the daughters, after charging them with the whole amount of the advancements, is a good answer to the plea in bar. And we think the replication sufficient in this respect.
The statute does not require that the advancements should be accounted for out of the real estate, either in whole or in part, if there be sufficient personal estate. For…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Grattan v. GrattanIllinois Supreme Court · 1856
- McClanahan v. McClanahanWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1892
- Watkins v. YoungSupreme Court of Virginia · 1878