Case Name: In Re WYNEA'S ESTATE. WYNEA et al, Appellants, v. WYNEA, Respondent
Court: South Dakota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: South Dakota
Decision Date: 1918-11-29
Citations: 41 S.D. 143
Docket Number: File No. 4395
Parties: In Re WYNEA’S ESTATE. WYNEA et al, Appellants, v. WYNEA, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Dakota Reports
Volume: 41
Pages: 143–144

Head Matter:
In Re WYNEA’S ESTATE. WYNEA et al, Appellants, v. WYNEA, Respondent.
(169 N. W. 816).
(File No. 4395.
Opinion filed Nov. 29, 1918).
Wills — Conditional Devise — -Precatory Words — Former Opinion Followed.
Upon appeal from a judgment affirming a probate decree of distribution of realty, involving construction of a clause in a will expressing testator’s “wish” that a named heir have the privilege of keeping testratrix’s farm' upon paying a certain designated amount, the former decision In re Wynea’s estate, 40 S. D. 416, 167 N. W. 394, followed.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Bon Homme 'Count)-. Hon. Robert B. Tripp, Judge.
In the matter of the estate of Taetske Wynea, deceased. From a judgment of the circuit court, affirming an order and' decree of the county court for distribution in favor of Theodore Wynea, Henry Wynea and others appeal.
'Reversed and remanded
■ French, Orvis & French, and C. M. Stikmll, for Appellants.
Wicks & Quinn, for Respondent.

Opinion:
WHITING, P. J.
This is an appeal from the same judgment from which the appeal was taken in In re Wynea's Estate, 167 N. W. 394, and presents the same question therein- passed upon. This appeal was taken (by those legatees who were not parties to the other appeal. The same counsel represent respondent as represented him upon such appeal.
Realizing that the -burden is upon them to convince ns that we w-ere in error ini our opinion upon such former appeal, counsel have filed an exceedingly exhaustive and illuminating brief, to which we have given careful attention. They have failed, however, to convince us that we were in- error in such former opinion, and, for the reasons therein set forth, the judgment appealed' from is again reversed.