Richmond daily register. (Richmond, Madison County, Ky.) 1917-1978, 1921-05-13
In Preliminary Decision In Trial
of Mrs. Elizabeth Irvine's
Will Case In Circuit
Court

tween David Irvine, of kansa.
City, Mo-, and William Irvine
Grecnway, OF Reno, Nevada, woi
ownership OF the fine farm OF
about 300 acres on the Lancaster
and Barnes Mill pike, under tho
will Of the late Mrs. William NJ
Irvine, were won by Mr. Irvine
in the Madison circuit court Fri
day morning. Judge Shackel-
ford overrulcd a demurrer filed
by Attorney Grant +. Lilly. OF
Lexington, to answer in the case
filed by Attorney John holland,
OF this city. and Judge John d.
Carroll. of Louisville, for Mr.. ir-
vine.
While only a preliminary step
in the case. this action by the
court is regarded in court circles
as indicative Of a final Judgment,
for in the arguments of counsel
before the court. the entire facts
in connection with the will Of the
late Mrs. Irvine and her late hus-
band. VIM. Irvnic, were set forth
at length. Extended arguments
were made by attorneys for all
parties involved with the cxccp-
ton Of Attorney \. X. Burnam.
representing John ". Croole, eX-
ccutor OF the will. who is inter
ested only to the extent Of OBJ
tanning an exact and legal con
struction OF the will of Mrs. r.
vine.
There was a brilliant array. OF
legal talent present when the
Irvine will case came up at mo-
ton hour in circuit court Friday
morning by agreement of attor-
ncys. Representing John w
Crookc. executor Of the will. was
Attorney 4. II. Burnam, of this
city: representing David Irvine.
of Kansas City. Mo. were Judge
John D. Carroll. former chief
justice OF the Court of Appeals OF
Is Kentucky. and attorney John
holland, OF this city; representing
Nm. Irvine Grccnway, Of Reno.
Nevada. was Attorney Grant i.
Lilly, OF Lexington, and repre-
Scnting David Irvine White. Of
Huntsville. Ala, and Mrs. Shelb,
NJ. Walker. of New Orleans. was
Attorney Henry NJ. Duncan. Of
Lexington.
Judge Walker. of the L. s.
Circuit Court OF Appeals. of New
Orcnas. was here also. looking
after his wifc's interests.
ut motion hour. Attorney John
holland fled IN answer on behalf
of David Irvine to the demurrer
OF Nm. Irvine Grccnway. Judge
Shackclford consulted with the
attorneys and it was agreed thai
the question OF title to the farm
could be settled on demurrer. At
torncy y. K. Burnam. represent
ING Executor Crookc. said that he
did not desire to be heard on this
argument that d he saw ii there
were two questions to be passed
upon AT such = hearing: the ques-
ton Of disposition of the fariY
and alleged failure Of Mrs. Irviri
TO have rcinvestcd certain sum
which came under the wifi Of the
late David Irvine.
Judge Shackclford said he
would hear arguments first re-
garding disposition of the farm
under the will of Mrs. Irvine.
Agreement was had among the
attorneys and the court as to pro
ccdure OF argument. Judge
Lilly then stated his demurrer 10
the answer OF David Irvine. Rc
alleged that the farm had come to
Mrs. Irvine i'll fee simple bv tn.
will of her husband; he said the
FIRST paragraph of her husbands
will gave her the farm in fec
simple; that his will stated that
i'll the event she dies intestate he
desired to make certain DISPOSE
ton; that she did not die incstate
but made her last will and testl-
ment. He pointed out that in
the concluding paragraph of VIM.
lrvine's will his wife was given
absolute power to alter, change,
approve or revoke any portion or
the whole of his special bequests.
Judge Lilly argued that the
will having given the property to
her in fee simple, any subsequent
disposition OF it was void. and
that after--having given it to her
in fee simple there could be no
remainder. He pointed out that
there was express revocation in
her will OF any bequest of stocks.
bonds or real estate to any child
rem of Sara or Addison White.
He declared that even if the Il