Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Yates v. Shern, 86 N.W. 1004.

36 citing documents.

Matter of Estate of Arend 373 N.W.2d 338 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Matter of Estate of Arend 373 N.W.2d 338 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161, 165 , 86 N.W.
In Re Trusteeship Under Will of Schmidt 256 Minn. 64 Minn. 1959
First National Bank v. Kirschmann 97 N.W.2d 441 Minn. 1959
In Re Trusteeship Under Will of Schmidt 256 Minn. 64 Minn. 1959
790 ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , 86 N.W.
First National Bank v. Kirschmann 97 N.W.2d 441 Minn. 1959
Bank & Trust Co. 192 Minn. 143 , ; In re Estate of Sherk, 191 Minn. 143 , ; In re Estate of Turle, 185 Minn. 490 , ; In re Estate of Martin, 166 Minn. 269 , ; In re Estate of Peavy, 144 Minn. 208 , ; Barney v. May, 135 Minn. 299 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; Annotation, 144 A. L. R. 1162, 1163.
In Re Estate of Convey 225 N.W. 17 Minn. 1929
In Re Estate of Convey 225 N.W. 17 Minn. 1929
Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; Rong v. Haller, 109 Minn. 191 , , 26 L.R.A.(N.S.)
In Re Estate of Martin 207 N.W. 618 Minn. 1926
In Re Estate of Martin 207 N.W. 618 Minn. 1926
Moreover, it would disregard the rule, as sensible as it is well established, that a will is to be read as a whole and the testator’s “intention is to be gathered from everything contained within the four corners of the instrument.” Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161, 165 , , Johrden v. Pond, 126 Minn. 247 , ; In re Will of Bell, 147 Minn. 62 , ; Bradford v. Martin, supra.
Benson v. Benson 194 N.W. 766 Minn. 1923
Benson v. Benson 194 N.W. 766 Minn. 1923
Thus, under a gift to fluctuating classes, as children or descendants, all who answer the description at the death of the testator are entitled, irrespectively of those to whom the description was applicable at the date of the will, but who subsequently died in the testator’s lifetime.” Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , .
Buck v. Huntley 187 N.W. 411 Minn. 1922
Buck v. Huntley 187 N.W. 411 Minn. 1922
In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; Brookhouse v. Pray, 92 Minn. 448 , ; Johrden v. Pond, 126 Minn. 247 , ; In re Bell, 147 Minn. 62 , ; In re Estate of J. D. Anderson, 148 Minn. 44 , .
In re the Estate of Meldrum 183 N.W. 835 Minn. 1921
In re the Estate of Meldrum 183 N.W. 835 Minn. 1921
Long v. Willsey, 132 Minn. 316 -320, ; Brookhouse v. Pray, 92 Minn. 448 -451, ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , .
Anderson v. Brower 180 N.W. 1019 Minn. 1921
Anderson v. Brower 180 N.W. 1019 Minn. 1921
48 ; Whiting v. Whiting, 42 Minn. 548 , ; In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , ; State v. Willrich, 72 Minn. 165 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; Brookhouse v. Pray, 92 Minn. 448 , ; Davis v. Hancock, 95 Minn. 340 , 104 * ; Rong v. Haller, 109 Minn. 191 , , 26 L.R.A.(N.S.)
In re the Trusteeship under the Last Will & Testament of Bell 179 N.W. 650 Minn. 1920
In re the Trusteeship under the Last Will & Testament of Bell 179 N.W. 650 Minn. 1920
In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; Johrden v. Pond, 126 Minn. 247 , .
Savela v. Erickson 163 N.W. 1029 Minn. 1917
Savela v. Erickson 163 N.W. 1029 Minn. 1917
Kottmann v. Gazett, 66 Minn. 88 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; but there are other well settled principles of law to be considered in connection with this one.
Johrden v. Pond 148 N.W. 112 Minn. 1914
Johrden v. Pond 148 N.W. 112 Minn. 1914
* * ■ * As such instruments always vary, subtle rules of construction, so often resorted to, obstruct, rather than assist, in determining the intention of the testator.” To the same effect are In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , .
Bemis v. Northwestern Trust Co. 135 N.W. 1124 Minn. 1912
Bemis v. Northwestern Trust Co. 135 N.W. 1124 Minn. 1912
Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , .
Lohlker v. Lohlker 127 N.W. 1122 Minn. 1910
Lohlker v. Lohlker 127 N.W. 1122 Minn. 1910
Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , .
Rong v. Haller 123 N.W. 471 Minn. 1909
Rong v. Haller 123 N.W. 471 Minn. 1909
Simpson v. Cook, 24 Minn. 180 ; In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , .
Watkins v. Bigelow 101 N.W. 497 Minn. 1904
Watkins v. Bigelow 101 N.W. 497 Minn. 1904
Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , .
Brookhouse v. Pray 100 N.W. 235 Minn. 1904
Brookhouse v. Pray 100 N.W. 235 Minn. 1904
In re Swenson’s Estate, 55 Minn. 300 , ; Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ; Schouler, Wills, § 463.
Hemenway v. Draper 97 N.W. 874 Minn. 1904
Hemenway v. Draper 97 N.W. 874 Minn. 1904
This is in harmony with the general rule for the construction of such language, and with the statutes on the subject of the descent of property (Yates v. Shern, 84 Minn. 161 , ), and is made manifest and obvious by the sixth subdivision of the by-laws, which provides for payment to the surviving brother or sister if no issue of other brother or sister be living.