Elizabeth Surman executed her last will and testament on Jan. 1, 1912. On Sept. 7, 1916 she and her husband, Frank E. Surman, adopted a minor, Frank Surman, as their son. Mrs. Surman died in 1923 and her will was admitted to probate under which the husband was named sole legatee and devisee, and was appointed administrator.

Frank H. Surman, the adopted son, brought an action in the Cuyahoga Common Pleas to contest the will of Elizabeth Surman; and by direction of the court the jury brought in a verdict for him, finding that the instrument purporting to be the last will and testament of Elizabeth Surman was not her last will and testament. Judgment was rendered on the verdict and the husband’s motion for a new trial was overruled.

Error, was prosecuted and the husband contended that Frank, being a nadopted child, was not entitled to any part of the estate, for the reason that he does not stand in the same relation as a child of natural parents. The Court of Appeals held:

1. Under the adopting statute, 8029 GC., the following is found—“and declaring that from that date, to all legal intents and purposes such child is the child of the petitioner.” And in 8030 GC.—“Such child shall be the child and legal heir of the persons so adopting him or her, entitled to all the obligations of a child of such person begotten in lawful wedlock.” Kroff v. Amrhein et, 94 OS. 282.

2. If the parents had at the time of the adoption, natural children who survived them or had children born to them after the adoption who survived them, the adopted child would be a co-heir with such natural children with like and equal powers of inheritance from the adopting parents.

3. Under the holding of the courts the term “adopted child” unless otherwise indicated means “natural child.”

4. In the instant ease, the testatrix, having no children at .the time of; executing the. will, but afterwards having a child living, namely Frank, the adopted child, the case comes clearly within 10561 GC. which provides: “If testator had no children at the time of executing his will, but afterwards has a child living or born alive after his death, such will shall be revoked.”

Judgment of lower court affirmed.