Miller v. Miller
Citations
- 91 Kan. 1
- 136 P. 953
- 1913 Kan. LEXIS 322
Syllabus
<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Conveyance — A Freehold, Estate in Remainder to Commence in Future May be Created without a Particular Estate to Support it. . A grantor executed a voluntary conveyance of land to his son for life, remainder to the son’s wife for life should she survive her husband, or so long as she remains his widow, remainder in fee to the heirs of his son’s body, and in default of such heirs, reversion to the grantor. The grantor filed the deed for record and “afterwards offered it to his son who refused to accept it. At that time the wife and two children of the son were living. Held:</p> <p>1. Common Law Abrogated by Statute. The common-law restrictions on the creation of future estates were abolished by section 3 of chapter 22 of the General Statutes of 1868, providing that conveyances of land or of any other estate or interest therein may be made by deed, and the remainders to • the son’s wife and to the heirs of his body are valid although the particular estate for life to him did not come into existence.</p> <p>2. Remainders Not Accelerated. The remainders are not accelerated by the refusal of the son to accept the conveyance of the life estate to him.</p> <p>3. -- Independent Grants. The provision for the son is not so complicated with the other gifts specified in the deed that the failure of one destroys them all.</p> <p>4. Heirs of Body — When Ascertained. The son has no heirs at all while living. Who the heirs of his body may be can not be ascertained until his . death, and children now in being take nothing under the deed unless they outlive their father.</p> <p>5. Recording by Grantor —■ Delivery — Acceptance. The recording of the deed by the grantor made it effective as to all pei'sons benefited by it who did not dissent.</p> <p>6. Interpretation — Language of Instrument — Surrounding Circumstances. The intention of the grantor is to be ascertained from the language employed in the deed. In case of doubt, interpretation may be aided
Judges: Burch
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
41 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Dyal v. BruntSupreme Court of Kansas· 1942-03-10· cited 28×
- Brungardt v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas· 1955-12-10· cited 26×
- Wright v. JenksSupreme Court of Kansas· 1927-12-10· cited 21×
- Tomb v. BardoSupreme Court of Kansas· 1941-06-07· cited 21×
- McCartney v. RobbinsSupreme Court of Kansas· 1923-07-07· cited 20×
- Sharpe v. SmithNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1961-04-03· cited 19×
- Platt v. WoodlandSupreme Court of Kansas· 1926-06-12· cited 18×
- Kimberlin v. HicksSupreme Court of Kansas· 1939-10-07· cited 18×
- Epperson v. BennettSupreme Court of Kansas· 1946-04-06· cited 18×
- Aguilera v. CorkillSupreme Court of Kansas· 1968-04-06· cited 16×
- Palmer v. PalmerSupreme Court of Alabama· 1980-12-05· cited 16×
- Stalcup v. DetrichCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2000-08-04· cited 16×
- Board of Directors of Fort Scott Public Library v. City of Fort ScottSupreme Court of Kansas· 1932-01-30· cited 13×
- Smith v. McHenrySupreme Court of Kansas· 1922-05-06· cited 12×
- Knutson v. HederstedtSupreme Court of Kansas· 1928-02-11· cited 12×
- Ward v. WardSupreme Court of Kansas· 1941-01-25· cited 12×
- Hansen v. WalkerSupreme Court of Kansas· 1953-07-06· cited 10×
- Alexander v. GoellertSupreme Court of Kansas· 1941-01-25· cited 10×
- Sellick v. SellickMichigan Supreme Court· 1919-08-09· cited 10×
- In re Marriage of NelsonCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2020-10-02· cited 9×
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.