Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-07-06
REscR|pTs FROM
MAINE LAW COURT

| The first rescripts to be handed down
at this session of the Law Court made
their appearance Wednesday. All OF
them were drawn by Chief Justice Saw
age and they dealt with probate mat
ters The rescripts were as follows:
| Somerset County. Charles D. Holbrooil
vs.. Leon l.. Libby ct al, executors. Re-
script by Savage, c j.
| l. BY statute, the presentment of a
| claim against the estate of a deceased
person to the executor or administrator
probate court. supported by the affida-
Wit of the claimant, or of some person
cognizant thereof, is a condition pre-
| cedent to the right to maintain an action
thereon: and such presentment or filing
must be alleged and proved
?. An affidavit made before notary
public in Minnesota in support of a claim
against the estate of a deceased person
with the statute, unless it be shown that
in Minnesota notaries public are author
lied to administer oaths.
| 3. At common law a notary public had
4. In the absence of proof to the con-
trary. the law of Minnesota is presumed
to be like our common law.
Exceptions sustained.
Hancock County. Oscar L. Tapley,
Executor, VS.. Hattie r. Douglass ct ais
A testator made the following bequest:
IL will and bequeath TO Hattie r. Doug
lass $1,000 in money, all of the household
| furniture and housekeeping articles in
the house in which / now live together
with all the personal property in the
barn, and one-half of all the personal
property in the store at the corner which
| now occupy, TO have and to use as
long as she shall remain the widow of
jeremiah Douglass Under this bequest
| il is
| Held. that Hattie r. Douglass has a
life estate in the money and other prop
erty mentioned in the bequest to her.
that it is the duty of the executor to
/ pay the money and deliver the other
/ property to her upon her giving such
security for the benefit of the remainder
, of probate who makes the order OF dis
| tributiOn
Bill sustained.
Decree in accordance with the opinion.
PenOhScot County. Arlena M, Perry VS.
! Charles r. Boswell
! A person owning homestead situated
partly in Exeter and partly in Garland,
conveyed 'all my right, title and inter-
est to certain real estate, situated in
the town of Exeter being my
homestead place and the same real es-
tate described in a mortgage given by me
to j. A. B. under date of August II, 1893,
and recorded in Penobscot Registry of
Deeds in VOL 795, page All, to which
| mortgage reference may be had for full
and particular description" The descrp-
ton in the mortgage referred to was, "a
certain lot or parcel of land known as
the homestead of said ]. A. B.. lying a
part in said town of Exeter and part in
Garland" etc.
l. Held that the deed conveyed that
part of the homestead which lay in Gar
| land as well as the part in Exeter
.. The cardinal rule for the interpre-
! tation of deeds is the expressed intention
OF the parties gathered from all parts
OF the instrument, giving each word its
due force. and read in the light of exist
! ing conditions.
g. A reference in a deed to other deeds.
when it appears that il was so intended.
makes them part of the description,
as much as If their language had been in
corporated and copied as a part of it.