Court Opinion

ID: 9860275
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 23:16:52.718455+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:20:22.634144
License: Public Domain

Supplemental Opinion on Rehearing Pee Curiam : Upon remanding this case for further proceedings, we had directed that a decree be entered providing for distribution of the residuary estate to all legatees and devisees named in the will of the testatrix, with the exception of two named devisees.  In a petition for rehearing, it is pointed out that under the terms of the decree entered by the circuit court, a devisee named in the will and made a party to this cause, was barred from participation in the residuary estate, and failed to appeal therefrom. It is contended that having failed to appeal from the decree, his rights are determined thereby, and he derives no benefit from its partial reversal. This point is well taken. In Griffin v. Griffin, 29 Ill2d 354, 194 NE2d 641, the court held that the interests of those persons who are made parties to an action of this kind, and who do not appeal from an adverse decree, are settled and determined by the decree of the trial court. Our prior decision is therefore modified to the extent that the devisee named in Paragraph Seventeenth of the will, is not entitled to any share of the residuary estate. This cause is remanded with directions to enter a decree consistent herewith. Decree affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.