Enos v. Snyder

Last updated
Enos v. Snyder
Seal of the Supreme Court of California.svg
Decided December 21, 1900 (1900-12-21),
Full case nameSusie T. Enos and Gertrude Willis v. Rachel Jane Snyder and E. S. Lippitt
Citation(s)63 P. 170, 131 Cal. 68, 53 L.R.A. 221, 82 Am. St. Rep. 330, 1900 Cal. LEXIS 735
Case history
Subsequent historyHearing in Bank denied
Procedural historyAppeal from the Superior Court of Sonoma County
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting McFarland, Temple, Henshaw
Case opinions
MajorityMcFarland, joined by Temple and Henshaw
Superseded by
California Statutes (1947), Chapter 126, §1;
California Statutes (1947), Chapter 125, §1

Enos v. Snyder, 63 P. 170 (Cal. 1900), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of California holding that a will could not serve to transfer a testator's dead body away from the next of kin, [1] and that the next of kin's right to custody of a dead body defeats any right of the executor. [2] The holding was at least partly superseded by statute in 1947, permitting testators to dispose of their remains via will for certain purposes. [3]

Contents

Facts and procedural background

External image
Searchtool.svg An engraving of the late John S. Enos that The San Francisco Call printed the day after his death.

John S. Enos, formerly a California State Senator, died aged 72 in Sonoma, California on March 30, 1898, of a heart attack. [4] At the time of his death, he had for several years lived with Rachel Jane Snyder, to whom he was not married. In his will, Enos instructed that the disposition of his remains would be left to Snyder. After Enos' death, Susie T. Enos and Gertrude Willis—John Enos' wife and daughter, respectively—demanded that Snyder release John Enos' remains to them. They commenced the action when Snyder refused this demand. E.S. Lippitt, the executor of Enos' will, was made a defendant upon his application. The lower court awarded judgment to the plaintiffs, and the defendants appealed. [5] [6]

Holding

The general English and American authorities on the subject are not very satisfactory . . . . It is quite well established, however, by those authorities that, in the absence of statutory provisions, there is no property in a dead body, that it is not part of the estate of the deceased person, and that a man cannot by will dispose of that which after his death will be his corpse.

Enos v. Snyder,131Cal.68, 69(1900).

In an opinion by Justice McFarland, the court affirmed the Superior Court's invalidation of John Enos' testamentary disposition of his remains. In reaching this judgment, the court cited the 1882 English case of Williams v. Williams , distinguished O'Donnell v. Slack , 123 Cal. 285 (1890), and applied California law. [7] [8]

In Williams, the testator had instructed his executors to give his remains to his mistress for cremation. At the insistence of the next of kin, his remains were buried instead. Subsequently, the testator's mistress obtained a license to exhume and rebury the remains. She had them transported to Milan, cremated and buried, whereupon she sued the executors and next of kin for reimbursement of her expenses. The High Court of Justice, Chancery Division held that the plaintiff could not recover as, among other reasons, a gift of a decedent's remains is invalid. [9] [10]

Notes

  1. ↑ Lorshbough (1946 , p. 278)
  2. ↑ Dutcher (1902 , p. 903)
  3. ↑ Taylor (1947 , p. 14)
  4. ↑ "John S. Enos Stricken Down". San Francisco Chronicle. Vol. 67, no. 75. March 31, 1898. p. 4. Retrieved 5 January 2016– via Newspapers.com. Open Access logo PLoS transparent.svg
  5. ↑ Enos v. Snyder,131Cal.68, 68–69(1900).
  6. ↑ Barish (1956 , p. 42)
  7. ↑ Grinnell (1905 , p. 346 col. 2 & n. 2)
  8. ↑ Enos v. Snyder,131Cal.68(1900).
  9. ↑ Barish (1956 , p. 41)
  10. ↑ Lorshbough (1946 , pp. 277–278)

Related Research Articles

Will and testament Legal declaration by which a person distributes their property at death

A will or testament is a legal document that expresses a person's (testator) wishes as to how their property (estate) is to be distributed after their death and as to which person (executor) is to manage the property until its final distribution. For the distribution (devolution) of property not determined by a will, see inheritance and intestacy.

Legal history of wills

Wills have a lengthy history.

Probate Proving of a will

Probate is the judicial process whereby a will is "proved" in a court of law and accepted as a valid public document that is the true last testament of the deceased, or whereby the estate is settled according to the laws of intestacy in the state of residence of the deceased at time of death in the absence of a legal will.

Estate planning

Estate planning is the process of anticipating and arranging, during a person's life, for the management and disposal of that person's estate during the person's life, in the event the person becomes incapacitated and after death. The planning includes the bequest of assets to heirs and may include minimizing gift, estate, generation skipping transfer, and taxes. Estate planning includes planning for incapacity as well as a process of reducing or eliminating uncertainties over the administration of a probate and maximizing the value of the estate by reducing taxes and other expenses. The ultimate goal of estate planning can only be determined by the specific goals of the estate owner and may be as simple or complex as the owner's wishes and needs directs. Guardians are often designated for minor children and beneficiaries in incapacity.

Holographic will Handwritten and signed will and testament

A holographic will, or olographic testament, is a will and testament which is a holographic document, i.e., it has been entirely handwritten and signed by the testator. Traditionally, a will had to be signed by witnesses attesting to the validity of the testator's signature and intent, but in many jurisdictions, holographic wills that have not been witnessed are treated equally to witnessed wills and need only to meet minimal requirements in order to be probated:

Will contest

A will contest, in the law of property, is a formal objection raised against the validity of a will, based on the contention that the will does not reflect the actual intent of the testator or that the will is otherwise invalid. Will contests generally focus on the assertion that the testator lacked testamentary capacity, was operating under an insane delusion, or was subject to undue influence or fraud. A will may be challenged in its entirety or in part.

Incorporation by reference

In law, incorporation by reference is the act of including a second document within another document by only mentioning the second document. This act, if properly done, makes the entire second document a part of the main document. Incorporation by reference is often found in laws, regulations, contracts, legal and regulated documentation.

Acts of independent significance

The doctrine of acts of independent significance at common law permits a testator to effectively change the disposition of his property without changing a will, if acts or events changing the disposition have some significance beyond avoiding the requirements of the will.

Testamentary capacity

In the common law tradition, testamentary capacity is the legal term of art used to describe a person's legal and mental ability to make or alter a valid will. This concept has also been called sound mind and memory or disposing mind and memory.

Insane delusion

Insane delusion is the legal term of art in the common law tradition used to describe a false conception of reality that a testator of a will adheres to against all reason and evidence to the contrary. A will made by a testator suffering from an insane delusion that affects the provisions made in the will may fail in whole or in part. Only the portion of the will caused by the insane delusion fails, including potentially the entire will. Will contests often involve claims that the testator was suffering from an insane delusion.

Joint wills and mutual wills are closely related terms used in the law of wills to describe two types of testamentary writing that may be executed by a married couple to ensure that their property is disposed of identically. Neither should be confused with mirror wills which means two separate, identical wills, which may or may not also be mutual wills.

Codicil (will)

A codicil is a testamentary or supplementary document similar but not necessarily identical to a will. In some jurisdictions, it may serve to amend, rather than replace, a previously executed will. In others, it may serve as an alternative to a will. In still others, there is no recognized distinction between a codicil and a will.

James B. Martindale was an American attorney and a founder of the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, the noted legal reference and catalog of lawyers that has since become Martindale-Hubbell, an information services company.

Wills Act 1837 United Kingdom legislation

The Wills Act 1837 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that confirms the power of every adult to dispose of their real and personal property, whether they are the outright owner or a beneficiary under a trust, by will on their death (s.3). The act extends to all testamentary dispositions or gifts, where "a person makes a disposition of his property to take effect after his decease, and which is in its own nature ambulatory and revocable during his life." As of 2012, much of it remains in force in England and Wales.

The creation of express trusts in English law must involve four elements for the trust to be valid: capacity, certainty, constitution and formality. Capacity refers to the settlor's ability to create a trust in the first place; generally speaking, anyone capable of holding property can create a trust. There are exceptions for statutory bodies and corporations, and minors who usually cannot hold property can, in some circumstances, create trusts. Certainty refers to the three certainties required for a trust to be valid. The trust instrument must show certainty of intention to create a trust, certainty of what the subject matter of the trust is, and certainty of who the beneficiaries are. Where there is uncertainty for whatever reason, the trust will fail, although the courts have developed ways around this. Constitution means that for the trust to be valid, the property must have been transferred from the settlor to the trustees.

In English law, secret trusts are a class of trust defined as an arrangement between a testator and a trustee, made to come into force after death, that aims to benefit a person without having been written in a formal will. The property is given to the trustee in the will, and he would then be expected to pass it on to the real beneficiary. For these to be valid, the person seeking to enforce the trust must prove that the testator intended to form a trust, that this intention was communicated to the trustee, and that the trustee accepted his office. There are two types of secret trust — fully secret and half-secret. A fully secret trust is one with no mention in the will whatsoever. In the case of a half-secret trust, the face of the will names the trustee as trustee, but does not give the trust's terms, including the beneficiary. The most important difference lies in communication of the trust: the terms of a half-secret trust must be communicated to the trustee before the execution of the will, whereas in the case of a fully secret trust the terms may be communicated after the execution of the will, as long as this is before the testator's death.

The South African law of succession prescribes the rules which determine the devolution of a person's estate after his death, and all matters incidental thereto. It identifies the beneficiaries who are entitled to succeed to the deceased's estate, and the extent of the benefits they are to receive, and determines the different rights and duties that persons may have in a deceased's estate. It forms part of private law.

Morice v Bishop of Durham [1805] EWHC Ch J80 is an English trusts law case, concerning the policy of the beneficiary principle.

Wills, Estates And Succession Act of British Columbia (WESA) is a provincial statute that governs the law of inheritance in British Columbia, Canada. The bill was introduced in Legislative Assembly of British Columbia on September 24, 2009 and received royal assent on October 29, 2009. WESA amalgamated and in some cases replaced five earlier pieces of legislation. These include: Estate Administration Act RSBC 1996, c. 122,Probate Recognition RSBC 1996, c. 376, Wills Act RSBC 1996, c. 489, Wills Variation Act RSBC 1996, c.Law and Equity Act RSBC 1996, c. 253, s. 46, 49, 50 & 51 and Survivorship and Presumption of Death Act RSBC 1996, c. 444. WESA has given the court curative discretion under Part 5, and in Section 60 allows the court to invalidate and supplant testamentary instruments that are deemed by the court defective as regards proper maintenance and support of the will-maker's spouse or children.

The Sacramento County Public Law Library (SCPLL) is a “public” law library in the capital city of the State of California. In 1891 the state of California enacted statutes mandating an independent law library in every county. Since its inception SCPLL has provided free public access to legal information.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.