Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1917-06-28
SETTLEMENT IN SIGHT
Legatees under Will of Mrs. e.
w. Peck May Agree. 4
History Of Litigation which Has Been
in Probate, Chancery and Supreme
Courts for the Last ID q
Years. tlVU

~
A formidable array Of legal talent, ind
attorneys from New York andI
Boston. representing several of the legal
tees under the will of the late Hafriet3
Clark Peck of this city, concluded a two1
days session at the Office of the Judge OF"
probate yesterday by drafting tentative
agreement. including terms of distribu.
ton. subject to the approval OF the pro-
bate court and the legatees who were not1
represented at the hearings. Tho attof>4
neys who were present were w. B. CD
Stickney of Rutland. William Odlin OF
Boston, William L. Woodward Of New.4
York. A. G. Whittemore. Max L. Poweil2
and Theodore f. Hopkins Of Burlingtou4
Prospects of a settlement of this caso1
which has been to the supreme court dv@I
times are believed to be favorable.
The will of Mrs. Peck was allowedsan0
established as her last win on FehfuAxy6
/. 1904. The amount of money said to-605
disposed of by the instrument waSrtlJouE15eS
to be we'll over 100000. but 1t Is nov 0a-}
lieved that the sum which will reach
the legatees will be in the neighborhood$
of $4,000. the difference giving an approxi-
mate idea of the cost of the litigation. Th0f
law also allows the legatees interest at thoJ
rate of six per cent. per annum. from 'the}
time Of the proving Of the will until the,
bequest is paid. but 1t is the belief OF
some of the parties concerned in the iGuiej
that they must be content with three perl
cent. interest and this condition is said to-
be part of the tentative agreement.
Another interesting legal question which
is raised is whether or not all of the lega.
tees will receive their requests. The per.
sons who were first remembered by the de-
ceased received such requests. that, II
! ma writ intA
consume the entire estate and make it
impossible for those last mentioned to re-
ccve anything. pro rata agreement.
however. is probably another part Of the
terms of distribution.
HISTORY OF THE CASE.
The will of Harriet Clark Peck was
allowed and established as her last will
on February 1. 1904.
/ The first litigation arose on the right
of her husband, Edward w. Peck, to
waive his wife's will. The statutes
| give a husband or wife eight months
within which they can waive the pro.
visions of the deceased persons will
and elect to take from his or her Is.
tate as though the deceased person had
died intestate. Within the eight
months Mr. Peck came into probate
| court and represented that he was un.
able to determine from the provisions
of his wifes will whether or not he
would waive and asked for an extern.
sion of time. Judge Bingham. then
judge of probate, granted his request
and the time was extended several
months Within the extended time Mr..
Peck filed formal waiver of his wife's
will.
The case has been in supreme court
Ave times. The first litigation was .
-
chancery for Chittenden county to con.
strue the will of Mrs, Peck. In county
court the bill was dismissed and this
decision was sustained in supreme
court. The supreme court. in handing
down its decision. said: THE evident
purpose of the bill is to transfer the
settlement of this estate ~from probate
court to the court of chancery. This
could not. be done without overruling
a long line of authorities and a well
settled practice in this State"
The second case grew out Of Mr..
Peck's waiver of the will. In the de-
cision of the supreme court. as report.
ed in volume so of Vermont Reports
the whole question Of the right Of q
widower to waive his wife's will ID
considered and determined. The stat
ute as to the widower's right wal
blind and the decision as handed down
|; by the supreme court established the
widower's right. Judge Bingham, at 4
hearing upon motion to dismiss th<
waiver ruled in probate court that the
waiver was imperative for the rea.
son that Mr.. Peck by his acts had pre-.
viously accepted the provisions and
, was therefore estopped to take an op-
position thereto An appeal was takeI
, by Mr.. Peck to county court and thu
case was passed to supreme court OF
exceptions. The supreme court re-
versed the decisions of both probate
, and county courts and held that thu
waiver of Mr.. Peck was properly made
! and that he was not estopped from
, waving the will by any Of his acts re-
. ferred to.
The next litigation arose from a petition
filed by William Odlin, attorney and
, guardian for the interests of the Jed p
. Clark family. Mrs. Peck being a daugh
ter of Mr.. Clark. The petition asked fol
r the removal of Sayles Nichols. for year,
confidential advisor Of the Peck family
and Gardner S. wainwright from theil
trust as executors of Mrs. Peck's wfl
: | Probate and county courts refused to TO
= move the executors and the supremt
. court sustained their decisions. The peti
. ton was based on the fact that Sayle
= Nichols. one of the executors, I
| beneficiary under the will, had persona
interest which was adverse to the interes
of the estate but the courts found tina,
y the executors were capable, faithful an<
honest, and declined to remove them.
= The next case arose from an appea
= from a decree of the probate court dis
6 tributing Mrs. Peck's estate. The deere,
:, gave Mr.. Peck 50, 900 and one-half of tn,
= residue of the estate, inherited from Mrs
| Peck's estate by virtue of his waiver a
: though she had died intestate. The deere,
:. was sustained in county and suprem
9 courts. this case being reported in the STU
Vermont Reports.
Il GOOD JOBS FOR u. V. M. MEr