Court Opinion

ID: 3305861
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-05 17:20:47.776181+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:33:02.633435
License: Public Domain

I dissent from the order denying a rehearing, and from the judgment.
I think it clear that under the statute of Minnesota, quoted in the opinion of the court, an administrator with the will annexed would, in that state, have had the same power of sale that was conferred upon the executor named in the will; and I think the authorities cited in the briefs sustain the proposition that the intention of the testator is to be gathered from the terms of the will as affected by the law of his domicile. That is to say, this testator must have intended that, in case of the refusal or failure of his nominee to act as executor, or of his ceasing to act, the administrator cum testamento annexo should exercise the power of sale, and that not only in Minnesota, but wherever his property was situated. *Page 177