While searching for something entirely different last week, I stumbled upon an amazing record of our family history: a legal notice announcing the hearing for the settlement of Peter D’s estate. The full notice is shown on the right, but I will also transcribe it here for easier reading.
Legal Notice
In the county court court [sic] of Hamilton county, Nebraska.
In the matter of the estate of Peter D. Buller, deceased.
All creditors, heirs and other persons interested in the estate of Peter D. Buller, deceased, will take notice that on the 28th day of October, 1919, Abraham P. Buller filed his petition in this court, alleging that Peter D. Buller died intestate on or about the 28th day of September, 1897, having been a resident and inhabitant of Hamilton county, Nebraska, and seized in fee simple of the following described real estate in the county of York and state of Nebraska, towit: The North Half (N½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE¼) of Section No. Sixteen (16), Township No. Ten (10) North, Range No. Four (4) West of the 6th P. M. and also the following real estate in Hamilton county, Nebraska, towit: The Northeast quarter (NE¼) of Section No. Twelve (12), Township No. Nine (9) North, Range No. Five (5) West of the 6th P. M.; that his debts are all paid; that he left surviving him as his sole and only heirs at law, his widow, Sarah Buller, and his children, Johann Buller, Peter P. Buller, Katharina Epp, David S. Buller, Cornelius P. Buller, Sarah Dick, Jacob P. Buller, Heinrich P. Buller, Abraham P. Buller and Maria Krause; that your petitioner is one of the heirs of the said Peter D. Buller and is the owner of an undivided interest in all of said real estate, subject to the dower and homestead rights of the widow of said deceased.
Petitioner prays for a determination as to who are the heirs of said deceased, their degree of kinship, and the right of descent of the real property of which the deceased died seized, and that all claims and demands against said estate of said deceased shall be forever barred, and for equitable relief.
Hearing will be had on said petition on the 8th day of December, 1919, in the county court room in the court house in the city of Aurora, in Hamilton county, Nebraska, at 10 o’clock a.m.
Dated at Aurora, Nebr., October 28, 1919. Fred Jeffers, County Judge W. W. Wyckoff, Attorney
Before we focus our attention on two surprising revelations in this legal notice, it will serve us well to summarize the document and define its unfamiliar terms.
Abraham P Buller, Peter D and Sarah’s youngest son, filed this petition on 28 October 1919. The petition asked the court to settle Peter D’s estate in terms of who were Peter D’s legal heirs, how they were related to him, and how the real property that Peter D left behind should be divided among them.
Some of the terminology used in this petition will be unfamiliar to those of us not accustomed to dealing with matters of estate settlement. For example, the petition states that Peter D died intestate; that simply means that he did not leave a (legally binding) will specifying the division of his property.
The petition also notes that Peter D was a resident and inhabitant of Hamilton County who had “seized in fee simple” the real estate listed. The word seized in land-ownership contexts means simply that Peter D owned the property; he was not a renter or tenant but the actual owner of the land. The phrase “fee simple” is another legal term, in this case signifying that Peter D held absolute title to the land, free from any claims against the title. This does not necessarily mean that there was no loan on the property, only that no one else had a claim on it.
Finally, the petition refers to certain rights that only Sarah had: dower and homestead rights. According to the dictionary at law.com (see here), dower is an “an old English common law right of a widow to one-third of her late husband’s estate.… the surviving wife can choose either the dower rights or, if more generous, accept the terms of her husband’s will.” Since it appears that Peter D died without a will, the petition acknowledges that Sarah was (presumably) entitled to at least a third of his real property. The petition also mentions Sarah’s homestead rights. As I understand the 1862 Homestead Act, the title to land homesteaded was granted to the head of the household; if the head of the household died, title to the land passed to his wife. It passed to the head of household’s children only if she, too, had died. Thus the petition recognizes that only Sarah can inherit the 80 acres that Peter D had homesteaded.
As noted earlier, the petition sought to settle Peter D’s estate by establishing who his rightful heirs were and how they were related to him. Of course, the petition itself provided the answers to these questions: Sarah was Peter D’s primary heir, entitled to the 80 acres he had homesteaded and at least one-third of all remaining real property; their ten children were Peter D’s secondary heirs: Johann Buller, Peter P. Buller, Katharina Epp, David S. Buller, Cornelius P. Buller, Sarah Dick, Jacob P. Buller, Heinrich P. Buller, Abraham P. Buller, and Maria Krause. Presumably the hearing proceeded smoothly, although I will be sure to scour the local newspapers around the time of the hearing date (8 December 1919) to see if any additional information can be located.
But about that date: Does it not seem odd that the settlement of Peter D’s estate took place over twenty years after his death? Peter D died on 28 September 1897, yet his estate remained unsettled until 8 December 1919. Why?
Beyond the timing of the probate hearing, the petition also reveals that Peter owned more property than we have realized to this point. In fact, Peter D owned farmland in Hamilton County and York County. Both the timing of the hearing and the real property in view require further exploration and thought, and both will be the subject of the following post.
No comments:
Post a Comment