The San Francisco call., 1910-10-05

ESTATE
CLAUS SPRECKEIS. No. s97T New Series
DECEASED.
APPLICATION. FOR FINAL, DISTRIBUTION
BY CLAUS A. sPRECKELS AND RUDOLPH
SSRECKELS, AS EXECUTORS OF THE LAST
Els. DECEASED. FOR FINAL DISTRIBUTION
OF THE ESTATE OF SAID DECEASED. THEIR
ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRATION HAVING
BEEN SETTLED, ALLOWED AND APPROVED.
APPLICATION or JOHN D. sPRBCKELs
AND ADOLPH B. SPRECKELS. AS SONS AND
HEIRS AT LAW, JOINING IN THE APPLI-
CATION FOR FINAL DIsrRIBUTloN OF THE
TRIBUTED ACCORDING TO LAW.
ANSWER OF CLAUS A. sPRECKEIs. 1Np1-
vIDUALBY. TO APPLICATION FOR FINAL
DISTRIBUTION.
ANSWER OF RUDOLPH sPRECKEIS. INDI-
vIDUALLY. TO THE SANE.
ANSWER OF CLAUS A. AND RUDOLPH
SPRECKELS As TRUSTEES FOR EMMA c.
FERRIS CNEE sPRECKELSg, To THE SAME.
ANSWER OF RUDOLPH AND CLAUS A.
sPREoKELS. AS EXECUTORS OF The LAST
WILL, AND TESTAMENT OF ANNA c.
SPRBCKELS, DECEASED, TO THE SANE.
CHARLES s. WHEELER.
CHARLES s. CUSHING.
NATHAN N MORAN,
A ? MORRISON,
n. ]. BR0BEGK,
T. FRIEDLANDER BOWIE.
OSCAR h. CUSHING.
n. H GORRILL.
PETER r DUNE.
s NJ. SHoRTRIDGE.
We have here C1) an application by
Claus a. and Rudolph Spreckels. eXecu-
tors named in the VIII OF Claus
Spreckels. for q final distribution of
his estate; % an application by two
others John y. and Adolph B. Spreck-
els. alleged coheirs at law. for partici-
patton I'm distribution; CD an applica-
tion by an heir, Claus A. that he have
an undivided portion OF the property Of
the deceased; 90 an application by an
ncir. Rudolph. that he have another un-
divided portion; t5) an application by
the trustees Of Emma {. Ferris, nee
Spreckels daughter Of decedent testa-
tor. that they have for her another
portion, and that John D. and Adolph B.
Spreckels be excluded from any par
ticipation in the division or distribution
of the estate Of the decedent, and 90
and application by Rudolph Spreckels
and Claus A. Spreckels, as executors Of
the viii Of Anna c. Spreckels, deceased,
widow Of Claus Spreckels aforesaid,
for the distribution to them ofy the
share 10 which she was entitled in his
estate.
The question in each case is whether
by res son Of certain circumstances the
two heirs at law, John d. and Adolph
b. are excluded from participation in
the distr. ,ution Of this estate.
1t is contended that the estate must
be distributed TO Claus A. Spreckels,
Rudolph Spreckels. and Emma e. Fer
ris. as the three heirs at law of Claus
spreckels, deceased, because the re-
naming two heirs at law. John D.
Spreckels and Adolph p. Spreckels,
have already received. by way of what
the law terms ''advanCements." in eX-
cess Of the shares that would come to
them. If they We're otherwise entitled,
. and if those advancements were mar
shaled for the purpose Of making the
The sections Of the statute cited in
support OF this contention are as fol-
lows;
Sec. 1895. civil Code. Any estate.
real or personal given by the de-
cedent in his lifetime as an ad-
vancement TO any child, or other
heir. is a part Of the estate of the
decedent for the purposes Of divf-
sion and distribution thereof among
his heirs, and must be taken by
such child. or other heir. toward
his share Of the estate of the de-
Sec. 1886. civil Code. If the
amount OF such advancement ex-
ceeds the share Of the heir receiv-
ing the same, he must be excluded
from. any further portion in the
division and distribution of the
estate. but he must not be re-
quired TO refund any part Of such
advancement; and If the amount
so received is less than his share,
he is entitled to so much more as
viii give his fun share OF the es-
tate Of the decedent.
Sec. 1897. Civil Code. All gifts
and grants are made as advance
rnents, II expressed in the gift or
grant to be so made, or If charged
in writing by the decedent AS an
advancement, or acknowledged in
writing as such by the child or
other successor or heir.
1t is argued that this question would
De readily resolved by a reading of
these sections. for they declare. in
terms unmistakable what shall be done
where advancements have been made. |
and in this case. II would appear that
the amount advanced exceeds the
share OF the two sons, John D. and |
Adolph B.; they have received it and |
il may not be reclaimed; but, If 1T has |
been by way of advancement. they are /
not entitled 20 participate in this dis |
tribution, and the three other children 1
are entitled to the whole estate.
II the applicants John ID. and Adolph !
3. Spreckels. have received their share /
by way Of advancement They are pre- |
cludsd from participating in this dis |
tributiorH By the antecedeHt action of |
the testator they are disentitled to a |
nlstrlDution Interest at the end OF the /
adulnl lstration Of his estate. An "es-
tate is what man leaves upon his !
aecease. property which a person leaves
70 De divided at his death; "See what
vast estate he left his son." and
me dececent here left an enormous
estate TO be divided among his child
ien- BY the terms Of his testament
ldn OF MS children. by the fourth
paragraph he expressly excluded other
chlldren from sharing in distribution
make no provision in this will for
my sons John D. and Adoipi e. Spreck-
els Tor the reason that 7 have already
given 70 them large part Of my es-
tate Here is distinct reference TO