The first post in this short series (here) introduced the 1919 legal notice about a hearing scheduled to settle Peter D Buller’s estate. The second post (here) explored one of two surprising discoveries within the notice: the fact that Peter D owned 80 acres in York County. This third and final post on Peter D’s estate will turn to, and try to explain, the second discovery: the twenty-two-year delay in settling Peter D’s estate after his death in 1897.
Instead of trying to imagine why the family delayed the legal settlement of Peter D’s estate, this post will turn the question around and explore why the family finally did settle his estate in 1919. Doing so may well give us insight into the reason for the long delay.
First, however, we need to set the background by learning about Nebraska estate law and practices in 1919. It seems that back then Nebraska did not specify how soon after a person’s death his or her estate needed to be settled. That is certainly not the case today. If I understand correctly, these days the most time-consuming probate cases (those that require preparation of a federal estate tax return) still must be settled within twenty-four months of the decedent’s passing.
The law was different in 1919, but a cursory review of the estate notices in Hamilton County and York County newspapers for 1919 and 1920 reveals that most estates were settled promptly, generally within a year or two after death. In several cases the hearing notice implies that a two-year waiting period was mandated when a person died intestate (see the Cochran, Hixon, Robson, and Scott notices referenced below). I do not know if this was the law or simply a common practice, but a delay in and of itself was not unusual in the case of people who died intestate, that is, without a will.
Nettie Robson’s estate, for example, was not settled until 1919, even though she passed away in 1907. Similarly, Martha A. Hixon died intestate early in 1895 (in Iowa), but her York County estate remained unsettled until late 1919. The case of Gerald A. Wieler and Anna Wieler is even more interesting. Gerald passed away intestate on 15 February 1912. His daughter Anna (her mother, Gerald’s widow, was also named Anna) died intestate five years later, on 1 January 1917. In July 1919, more than two years after the daughter’s death (as the notice is careful to specify), the widow and her living children petitioned the court to settle the estates of both parties, including the two Henderson lots that Gerald owned and deceased Anna’s undivided one-seventh share of an undivided three-fourths share of those lots. In other words, when Gerald died, his estate was effectively divided between his widow (25 percent) and his seven children (75 percent); when his daughter Anna died, her estate consisted of her share (one-seventh) of that 75 percent. One imagines that the family was prompted to settle Gerald’s estate (seven years after his death) because Anna’s death introduced a further complication to his estate settlement: Who was entitled to Anna’s share of Gerald’s estate?
How does this inform our understanding of the settlement of Peter D’s estate? It shows us that, in early twentieth-century Nebraska, the estates of those who died intestate could remain unsettled for years and that those estates generally were settled only when some other factor finally motivated the family to do so. Thus, we should not ask why Peter D’s family waited so long to settle his estate but rather why they finally decided to settle it in 1919, twenty-two years after his death. Fortunately, we have a significant piece of evidence that shines light on this question.
The figure to the right shows an extract from the 23 April 1920 newspaper The York Democrat (p. 1). One of the real-estate transfers recorded is from Sarah Buller, widow, et al. (= the children), to Heinrich E. Mierau. The property description contains an error—Sarah and family owned the north half, not the east half, of the northeast quarter of 16-10-4, but there can be no doubt that we are dealing with the same 80 acres in Brown township of York County.
Why is this notice of sale significant? Although we should be careful not to assume more than we actually know, it is reasonable to think that Peter D’s estate was finally settled in late 1919 and early 1920 so that Sarah and her children were legally authorized to sell the property to Heinrich Mierau. As long as Sarah and family continued to manage the farm on their own, there was no need to settle Peter D’s estate; however, when they wished to sell any part of that estate, it was necessary for them first to settle it, so that they could legally transfer title to the new owner.
We still do not know exactly how Peter D’s estate was divided, that is, what percentage Sarah received and what percentage was divided among the ten living children. We also do not know why the 80-acre plot was sold in 1920. It is tempting to link this sale with the apparent construction of a new house for Sarah in Henderson (see the evidence that a new home was constructed in 1920 here), but that may be going too far out on a limb. However, it seems safe to imagine that the settlement of the estate was prompted by the decision to sell the Brown township property. In addition, we can also deduce from this discussion that the Hamilton County farm was not sold, indeed, could not have been sold, before the settlement of Peter D’s estate. The original farm was still in family hands as late as 1920.
Estate Notices Referenced
Notice for Benjamin A. Cochran, The New Teller, 21 May 1919, p. 10.
Notice for Martha A. Hixon, The New Teller, 29 October 1919, p. 7.
Notice for Nettie Robson, The New Teller, 29 January 1919, p. 2.
Notice for Milton M. Scott, Aurora News Register, 19 February 1920, p. 8.
Notice for Gerald A. Wieler and Anna Wieler, The York Republican, 17 July 1919, p. 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment