Am researching my GGrandfather who died in Arkansas County, Arkanasas
in 1874. He'd married his third wife in 1872 and at that time had
three young adult sons, a married daughter, and a baby daughter (from
his second marriage) all living in Arkansas County. There were no
known children from the third marriage.
GGGrandpa was murdered along with at least one of his sons in a
robbery and died without a will. He wasn't a wealthy man, but owned
land and was considerably better off than many of his neighbors.
Oddly his probate documents list his baby daughter and a grandson as
his only heirs. No mention whatsoever of his wife or his other living
children.
Under today's estate laws his wife and possibly all of his children
would have been entitled to significant portions of her husband's
estate.
Curious to know whether there were any quirks of the law back then
that would have allowed the probate court to hopscotch entirely over a
legal, living wife and living adult children?
Any ideas?
Nancy T
Estate Law Question
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
singhals
Re: Estate Law Question
ntantiques wrote:
OFF the top of my head, and not disturbing the dust-mites by
consulting a book ...
are you SURE you got all the probate documents, such as the
distribution?
I seem to recall being told by someone once, 15 to 20 years
back, that the intestate law can be jiggered if all parties
agree in advance -- IOW, an heir-by-law can refuse his legal
stipend, which then returns to the common pot; if the son
who was killed simultaneously was childless, his wife got
nada. The married daughter "got hers" when she married and
wouldn't have taken anything the law said she was entitled
to anyway.
Then, too, if he were wealthy, it may have been worth his
while to get himself a pre-nup, which weren't uncommon in
that part of the world, particularly if he came out of S
Louisiana.
FWIW -- tuppence in a seller's market, perhaps.
Cheryl
Am researching my GGrandfather who died in Arkansas County, Arkanasas
in 1874. He'd married his third wife in 1872 and at that time had
three young adult sons, a married daughter, and a baby daughter (from
his second marriage) all living in Arkansas County. There were no
known children from the third marriage.
GGGrandpa was murdered along with at least one of his sons in a
robbery and died without a will. He wasn't a wealthy man, but owned
land and was considerably better off than many of his neighbors.
Oddly his probate documents list his baby daughter and a grandson as
his only heirs. No mention whatsoever of his wife or his other living
children.
Under today's estate laws his wife and possibly all of his children
would have been entitled to significant portions of her husband's
estate.
Curious to know whether there were any quirks of the law back then
that would have allowed the probate court to hopscotch entirely over a
legal, living wife and living adult children?
Any ideas?
Nancy T
OFF the top of my head, and not disturbing the dust-mites by
consulting a book ...
are you SURE you got all the probate documents, such as the
distribution?
I seem to recall being told by someone once, 15 to 20 years
back, that the intestate law can be jiggered if all parties
agree in advance -- IOW, an heir-by-law can refuse his legal
stipend, which then returns to the common pot; if the son
who was killed simultaneously was childless, his wife got
nada. The married daughter "got hers" when she married and
wouldn't have taken anything the law said she was entitled
to anyway.
Then, too, if he were wealthy, it may have been worth his
while to get himself a pre-nup, which weren't uncommon in
that part of the world, particularly if he came out of S
Louisiana.
FWIW -- tuppence in a seller's market, perhaps.
Cheryl
-
ntantiques
Re: Estate Law Question
On Sep 11, 8:43?am, singhals <singh...@erols.com> wrote:
I definitely didn't get the whole probate file. Only a few documents
regarding my GGGrandfather are currently available at the AR County
Courthouse. Local genealogy & historical societies are in the process
of restoring and preserving the individual files for the County - a
huge project which will take years to accomplish.
I do have the Assignment of Administrator document which lists the
deceased's assets at three thousand dollars and names only his baby
daughter and young grandson as heirs. Newspaper accounts indicate
that seven people died in a "slaughter" on the White River, but lists
only the bodies of my GGrandfather and "his son" as recovered and
identified.
He was from NC and TN, and, given his last residence, in rural
Arkansas, modest estate, and the fact that he died w/o making a will,
I'd be surprised if there was any sort of pre-nup. Your suggestion
that there might have been a Louisiana influence was a good thought,
though.
Have never been able to locate any info on any of his three sons or
his third wife after the date of his death, and am wondering if they
may have died with him - one possible explanation of why there was no
mention of them as heirs.
Also possible that wife #3 could have died between the 1872 marriage
and his 1874 death. The grandson who inheirited was the son of the
deceased's living adult daughter.
Am trying to determine what the prevailing probate law was at the time
regarding division of an estate where there was no will. If the law
provided that the wife and/or children would each get a slice, it
would support the idea that the wife and sons were dead - and save me
endless fruitless searching.
Nancy T
ntantiques wrote:
Am researching my GGrandfather who died in Arkansas County, Arkanasas
in 1874. He'd married his third wife in 1872 and at that time had
three young adult sons, a married daughter, and a baby daughter (from
his second marriage) all living in Arkansas County. There were no
known children from the third marriage.
GGGrandpa was murdered along with at least one of his sons in a
robbery and died without a will. He wasn't a wealthy man, but owned
land and was considerably better off than many of his neighbors.
Oddly his probate documents list his baby daughter and a grandson as
his only heirs. No mention whatsoever of his wife or his other living
children.
Under today's estate laws his wife and possibly all of his children
would have been entitled to significant portions of her husband's
estate.
Curious to know whether there were any quirks of the law back then
that would have allowed the probate court to hopscotch entirely over a
legal, living wife and living adult children?
Any ideas?
Nancy T
OFF the top of my head, and not disturbing the dust-mites by
consulting a book ...
are you SURE you got all the probate documents, such as the
distribution?
I seem to recall being told by someone once, 15 to 20 years
back, that the intestate law can be jiggered if all parties
agree in advance -- IOW, an heir-by-law can refuse his legal
stipend, which then returns to the common pot; if the son
who was killed simultaneously was childless, his wife got
nada. The married daughter "got hers" when she married and
wouldn't have taken anything the law said she was entitled
to anyway.
Then, too, if he were wealthy, it may have been worth his
while to get himself a pre-nup, which weren't uncommon in
that part of the world, particularly if he came out of S
Louisiana.
FWIW -- tuppence in a seller's market, perhaps.
Cheryl- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I definitely didn't get the whole probate file. Only a few documents
regarding my GGGrandfather are currently available at the AR County
Courthouse. Local genealogy & historical societies are in the process
of restoring and preserving the individual files for the County - a
huge project which will take years to accomplish.
I do have the Assignment of Administrator document which lists the
deceased's assets at three thousand dollars and names only his baby
daughter and young grandson as heirs. Newspaper accounts indicate
that seven people died in a "slaughter" on the White River, but lists
only the bodies of my GGrandfather and "his son" as recovered and
identified.
He was from NC and TN, and, given his last residence, in rural
Arkansas, modest estate, and the fact that he died w/o making a will,
I'd be surprised if there was any sort of pre-nup. Your suggestion
that there might have been a Louisiana influence was a good thought,
though.
Have never been able to locate any info on any of his three sons or
his third wife after the date of his death, and am wondering if they
may have died with him - one possible explanation of why there was no
mention of them as heirs.
Also possible that wife #3 could have died between the 1872 marriage
and his 1874 death. The grandson who inheirited was the son of the
deceased's living adult daughter.
Am trying to determine what the prevailing probate law was at the time
regarding division of an estate where there was no will. If the law
provided that the wife and/or children would each get a slice, it
would support the idea that the wife and sons were dead - and save me
endless fruitless searching.
Nancy T