The Medina sentinel. [volume] (Medina, Ohio) 1888-1961, 1920-01-09
W|4CAsE
BOBS Up once MORE
Court of Appeals Reverses De-
cisiOn Handed Down By c. P.
Court in Construction of
Melissa Britain Will.
MOTION FOR RE-HEARING
HAS BEEN FILED

A case which has become more or
less famous in Medina county on ac-
count of the publicity given it-that
of Roswell Hopkins and Zina Wallis,
executors VS.. Otis F. Briggs ct al
bobbed up again this week when the
court of appeals handed down a de-
cision reversing the judgment OF
comomn pleas court. The case was
one of construction of the will Of Me-
lissa Britain.
Melissa Britain made will of
June 8, 1893, and died on Feb. /,
1895. She had but one daughter at
the time, Mrs. Edna Bowes, who af-
forwards married Ulrich Steudler, to
whom she left her entire estate. AT
the time the will was drawn Edna
was anticipating the birth Of child.
The important part Of the instru-
ment reads as follows:
"It is my will that whatever prop
erty I may own at the time of my
death, both personal and real, be
given to my daughter, Mrs. Edna
Bowes, and wish it to be kept sep
arate and apart from any other prop
erty she may have, and if she should
die without issue from her own body,
then I wish the above property to be
equally divided between by brothers,
Henry F. Briggs, Otis Briggs, Sam
uel Briggs, and sisters, Sophie =.
Chatfeld and the children of my sis
ter, Abigail. Kinney, deceased, are
to have equal shares Of what would
have been their mothers share if liv-
ing; and also my sister Emily Hop
kins, deceased's son Roswell is to
have what would have been her share
| if living and if any of brothers or Sis
ters should die before myself, then
their children are to have equal
shares of parents share if living.
eff my daughter, Edna Bowes
should die and leave issue and it OF
they might die without issue, then
wish the property to be divided in
same manner as described. In case
of my daughter, Mrs. Edna Bowes
dying without issue.")
Edna Bowes Steudler received
$9148.26 from her mothers estate ane
died testate March 8, 1918, leaving 6
total estate valued at about $4,000
During her lifetime she had used the
money received from her mothers es
tate as her own and disposed of it by
will to Roswell Hopkins, one of the
plaintiffs. The child born to Mrs
Steudler had died five years after the
death of it's grandmother, Mrs. Brit
tain.
The point in question was whether
Mrs. Britain meant to leave her es
tate to her daughter, Mrs. Bowe'
Steudler, to be used as her own prop
erty, or whether it was not to be KEEP
in a separate fund by Mrs. Steudlel
at whose death-in the absence OF
living child-it should go to Mrs
1 Brittain's brothers and sisters.
Judge Mcclure in common plea
court ruled according to the latte
contention-that the property did no
belong to Mrs. Steudler in fee sim
pie that it was not hers to will as sh'
pleased at the time of her death. Th'
case was then appealed.
4 In reversing the decision hande'
| down in common pleas court, tn
court Of appeals says:
/ "If the construction placed by tn
Court Of Common Pleas prevails nj
beneficial estate would ever be veste'
in the daughter. 1t was fact tha
i Mrs. Britain was So years old whel
y the will was made; Edna was Il, an
the estate might have been tied Vi
over a hundred years had the chill
Of Edna lived, or until her 9TH
childs) decease. without issue.
tsIf Edna had lived without issu
prior to Mrs. Brittain's death, the
the property would be given t
brothers and sisters in fee simple 0
absolute estate. Had the will bee,
contested at the time Of probation
!. Mrs. Brittain's will this would hav
been the decision. NJ
aIt was evidently deceased's in
erty to Edna, that only the con
n Continued on page 1a)
u Vi Na