Case Title: In Re Estate of Bright

Citation: 482 S.W.2d 555

Docket Number: 

State: tennessee

Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

Date: 1972-06-05T00:00:00Z

Document:
482 S.W.2d 555 (1972) In re ESTATE of Zack T. BRIGHT. Supreme Court of Tennessee. June 5, 1972. E. Michael Ellis, Knoxville, for heirs of Zack T. Bright. Myron Ray Ely, Knoxville, for heirs of Jessie Lee Womack Bright. McCANLESS, Justice. Zack T. Bright and Jessie Lee Womack Bright were married in February, 1940. Each had been married previously and each had children by the former marriage. They had no children by this marriage. On July 19, 1952, Mr. and Mrs. Bright executed identical wills, each leaving all his property to his respective spouse, and James E. O'Connor and W.A. Carpenter were the attesting witnesses to both wills. Jessie Lee Womack Bright died on October 15, 1970, leaving three children surviving her. Zack T. Bright died on November 2, 1970, leaving two children and a grandchild surviving him. Neither had changed his will and Zack T. Bright had not been physically capable of changing his will after his wife had died. John Edward Womack, representing himself and the other children of Jessie Lee Womack Bright, presented to the County Court a petition by which he sought to probate both wills. He contended that he and those he represented were the beneficiaries of both estates. The children and grandchild of Zack T. Bright answered, denying that the children of Jessie Lee Bright had any interest in either estate and contended that John Edward Womack should not be allowed to probate either will. The County Judge heard the matter, ordered that both wills be admitted to probate, and appointed John Edward Womack administrator with the will annexed of both estates, conditioned upon his entering into bond in each estate. The children and grandchild of Zack T. Bright appealed to the Circuit Court which found that the will of Zack T. Bright was mutual and strictly reciprocal with the will of Jessie Lee Womack Bright, that it was the intent of the testators to have only one will take effect, that being the will of the first to die, thus vesting all property in the *556 survivor. The court, therefore, adjudged that the will of Zack T. Bright should not be admitted to probate and that the entire estate of both Jessie Lee Womack Bright and Zack T. Bright passed to the heirs of Zack T. Bright in accordance with the statutes of descent and distribution. In the Circuit Court the parties stipulated all the facts and the children of Jessie Lee Womack Bright have perfected their appeal in the nature of a writ of error to the Supreme Court. The heirs of Jessie Lee Bright contend that by reason of the terms of Section 32-306, T.C.A., the property devised and bequeathed to their mother by the will of Zack T. Bright passed to them. That Section is as follows: The Zack T. Bright heirs contend that the two wills were mutual and reciprocal and that the property of Jessie Lee Bright passed to her husband under the terms of her will, and that upon the death of Jessie Lee Bright her will became the only will of the parties and the will of Zack T. Bright thereupon became ineffective. In Church of Christ Home for Aged, Inc. v. Nashville Trust Co., 184 Tenn. 629, 202 S.W.2d 178 (1947), the court in considering mutual and reciprocal wills, in the words of Mr. Justice A.B. Neil, said: See also Seat v. Seat, 172 Tenn. 618, 113 S.W.2d 751 (1937). In this case, therefore, we are bound by the presumption that exists in such cases that Mr. and Mrs. Bright executed their wills "in accordance with their mutual contract to dispose of their property in this manner." In Maurer v. Johansson, 223 Iowa 1102, 274 N.W. 99 (1937), the Supreme Court of Iowa said: In this case the court held that the Iowa anti-lapse statute similar to Section 32-306, T.C.A. did not operate to raise the presumption that the testator intends his devise to go to the heirs of the devisee in case the devisee predeceases him, unless the will shows a contrary intent. In Wilson v. Starbuck, 116 W. Va. 554, 182 S.E. 539 (1935), the Supreme Court of West Virginia said: In American Jurisprudence, Wills, Section 737, the following statement appears which we adopt as the applicable law in Tennessee: The wills of Jessie Lee Bright and of Zack T. Bright were mutual and reciprocal, executed in accordance with their contract, and the will of Jessie Lee Bright, the first to die, became the only will of the parties. We affirm the judgment of the Circuit Court. DYER, C.J., CHATTIN and CRESON, JJ., and JENKINS, Special Judge, concur.