Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

29 Ohio St. 147

Corry v. Fleming

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1876

Ohio Supreme Court · decided 1876-12-15

The original petition was filed by E. C. Fleming and his wife, Rachel Fleming, to obtain from the court a construction of the last will and testament of Matthew Corry, deceased, the father of said Rachel.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1876-12-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1911

5 state decisions

2018761880189019001910decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Welch, C. J.

¶1We think the court erred in overruling the demurrer to this petition. It makes no case for eliciting the opinion of the court upon the construction of the will. It is only in cases where a trust is involved, or where the duty of an executor, administrator, or other trustee is of uncertain nature, requiring the guidance or direction of the court, that the court can be called upon merely to give its opinion as to the true construction of a will. The plaintiffs do not state that they are in possession of the lot, and ask to have the title quieted. They do not complain that they are kept out of possession, and ask to recover the lot. Nor do they even aver that the lot is a part of the residuum of the estate — that is, that there is enough without this lot to satisfy the legacies.' They make no case for any relief, beyond the mere opinion of the court, and they pray for nothing but that opinion. If they are right in their theory of the proper construction •of the will, they make a case, as between themselves and one-of the defendants, for partition of the premises; but they do not ask for partition. The petition simply sets forth a copy of the will, and asks the opinion of the court .as to its effect upon this after-acquired property.

¶2The- judgment, must be reversed, the demurrer to the petition sustained, and the cause remanded for further pro..ceeding. Judgment accordingly.

/29/ohiost/147 · .json · Public domain