Estate of Kelly

In Re Estate of Kelly

Good Law
112 Cal. App. 758·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 1085·297 P. 620
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 24, 1931Docket No. 7816.California703 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Spence, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting the petition of respondent Iris MacPherson for partial distribution.

The property involved is a diamond ring. The argument for reversal of the order is based entirely upon appellants’ construction of the terms of the will. The testator left an olographic will providing that his money was to be “divided between” his brothers and sisters; that his bonds were to be “divided between” his nieces, Hazel Stirling and Iris Macpherson, and then follows the provision in question, “Let Iris and Hazel shake dice for the diamond ring.” Following the testator’s death and before the dice had been shaken, Hazel died leaving an olographic will providing, “I want my half of the diamond ring ... to go to my mother, Elizabeth A. Stirling,” (one of the appellants herein). The court ordered the ring distributed to respondent Iris Macpherson upon her petition for partial distribution stating as follows: “The intention of the testator was that Iris or Hazel should have the ring. He had no intention to give each of the girls a share in the ring. The estate in the ring never passed to the two girls. Hazel died before the ring was disposed of and the only person to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.