Moore v. Weaver
Cases that cite this one
12 later published cases cite this decision.
- Caulfield v. Noonan (Iowa 1940)
- McAllister v. McAllister (Iowa 1918)
- Peet v. Monger (Iowa 1953)
- In re Estate of Smith (Iowa 1937)
- Murphy v. Murphy (Iowa 1920)
- Shick v. Howe (Iowa 1908)
- Meier v. Lee (Iowa 1898)
- Wilcke v. Wilcke (Iowa 1897)
- Estate of Parker v. Parker (Iowa 1896)
- Estate of Sunderland (Iowa 1883)
- Leonard v. Lining (Iowa 1882)
- Lash v. Lash (Iowa 1881)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The case involves an application of the principles of the following sections of the Code:
Sec. 2455. If the intestate leave no issue, the one-half of his estate shall go to his parents and the other half to his wife; if he leaves no wife the portion which would have gone to her shall go to his parents.
Sec. 2456. If one of his parents be dead, the portion which would have gone to such deceased parent shall go to the surviving parent, including the portion which would have belonged to the intestate’s wife had she been living.
Sec. 2457. If both parents be dead, the portion which would have fallen to their share by the above rule, shall be
The intestate left no issue, nor wife, and both his parents were dead. We must then inquire what would have been the result, under seetion 2457, if both the parents of the intestate had survived him, and died in the possession of the portion falling to their share. If the parents of the intestate had survived him, his father would have become seized of one-half of the estate and his mother of the other half. Upon the death of the mother her half would have descended to her legal heirs. The father would still have continued the owner of his half. Upon his marriage to the plaintiff Alvira, she would have acquired inchoate rights in this property, and upon his death she would have been entitled to one-third part of it in fee. That the above would have been the result had the intestate’s parents survived him, there' can be no question. But seetion 2457 of the Code declares that under the circumstances of this case the property shall be disposed of in the same manner as if the intestate’s parents had outlived him. We must, therefore, for the purposes of this case, suppose the intestate’s parents living at the time of his death. It is urged that the husband of the plaintiff, Alvira Moore, was at no time possessed of an estate in the property in question, and that, therefore, she cannot, under section 2440, take any interest therein. The answer is that under section 2457, the property is to he disposed of in the same manner as if the plaintiff’s husband had been possessed of an estate therein. See Neely v. Wise, 44 Iowa, 544. The judgment of the court below is correct, and is
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.