Stahl v. Stevenson

Citations

• 102 Kan. 447
• 171 P. 1164
• 1918 Kan. LEXIS 62

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Oral Promise — To Leave Share of Property to Heir — Not Within Statute of Frauds. A promise of an ancestor that he will at his death leave to an heir presumptive the share of his estate to which such heir, in the event of his then dying intestate, would be entitled under the statutes of descents and distributions, is not a contract for the sale of an interest in lands within the meaning of the statute of frauds, notwithstanding the ownership of real estate by the ancestor when the promise was made and at the time of his death.</p> <p>2. Same — Capable of Performance WitMn a Year. Such a contract is not one that is not to be performed within a year, within the meaning of the statute of frauds.</p> <p>3. Same — To Leave Property to Heir — Consideration Release of Interest in Life Insurance — Specific Performance. The holder of a life insurance policy in which his wife, who had since died, was named as beneficiary, desired to collect its surrender value, and for this purpose was required by the insurance company to obtain a release from her heirs. To induce the daughter of a deceased son to sign such release, he promised that if she would do so she should receive at his death one-third of his estate, which was the share she would have inherited had he then died intestate. She accepted the proposition and signed the release. He died leaving a will which had been executed before the transactions referred to, giving the entire estate to others. Held, in an action by the granddaughter of the testator against the beneficiaries under the will to recover a third of the estate, that whether or not the plaintiff’s signature was necessary to give her grandfather a valid claim against the company .for the whole value of the policy, her affixing it to the release at his request was a sufficient consideration to support a contract, and notwithstanding that any -possible interest she had in the insurance policy was trivial in comparison with the v