Ernest E. Spencer
Attorney at Law
Hayes Center, Nebrska
May 23, 1929.
Mr. Archie Wineland
Natoma, Kansas.
Dear Sir: In re: Estate of Bill Kirk, deceased.
I have been intending to write you for
some time concerning my findings on the questions you asked me concerning the
above estate, but I have been so busy as County Attorney with criminal work
that was forced to put this matter off.
The records show that Mrs. Kirk during
the course of the probate of the above estate secured permission of the District
Court to sell the real estate on the ground that there was not sufficient personal
property to satisfy the debts against the estate. The land was then sold by
Mrs. Kirk as administratrix at public sale to Joseph Hruza, he being the
highest bidder for $3500.00. The amount of land involved in the sale was two
quarters or 320 acres and the amount of the debt of the estate as claimed by
Mrs Kirk was #3622.15. The land as you will note sold for a little over $10.00
per acre. It is probably worth from $15.00 t $20.00 per acre. Mrs. Kirk as
administratrix gave a deed to Joseph Hruza, her brother on Jan. 9th
and on Feb. 13th Joseph Hruza deeded the land back to her for one
dollar and other valuable considerations. On April 15th Mrs. Kirk
gave a mortgage on the land to one Frank Kroutliek for $2000.00.
I have had a talk with one of the
appraisers, Mr. John Curran and while he admitted that the personal property
was appraised low he said that all of the farm machinery was old worn out stuff
and that it would not bring any more on a public sale. He was favorable to Mrs.
Kirk and in reply to one of my questions said that Mrs. Kirk deserved
everything that was coming to her. Mrs. Kirk as also allowed by the county
court $100.00 per month for 12 months for support of herself and family during
the administration of the estate. While this was very high yet no objection was
made at the time it was allowed so it would be impossible to object to that
part of it now.
I have also had a talk with Atty. John
F. Cordeal of McCook, who is considered one of the best probate lawyers in this
part of the State and we both agreed that while there is no doubt but that you
heirs couldopen up the proceedings which were had and that you might be able to
get the deed to the land set aside on the ground of fraud, yet there would be
such a small amount of money involved that it is doubtful whether it would more
than pay the expense. We also came to the conclusion that unless we could show
that the property had been fraudulently appraised to low and that the claims
allowed against the estate were in part improper that the sale of the land by
Mrs. Kirk to pay the debts would probably stand. If the court found that the
debts were proper and that the sale by Mrs. Kirk was proper we would loose the
case. While it seems clear to me that there was a considerable amount of fraud
yet I feel that it will be hard to prove and for that reason I would not want
you to spend any money when it is very doubtful whether you would get any money
if you won the suit. If this land is worth $15.00 er acre the total value would
be $4800.00 and after the debts of the estate were subtracted there would be
$1177.85 to divide between Mrs. Kirk and you 8 children which would give each
of you a little over $100.00. The expense of the resale of the land would also
have to come out of this sum if the court set the deed to the land aside. After
the expense of suit and attorneys fees I am doubtful if you would have anything
left.
I trust that this has fully answered
your questions and I will be glad to be of service to you heirs at any time in
any way.
Very truly yours,
(signed) E. E. Spencer
EES:KLS
Personal note: Guess my grandfather lost the land he was expecting when his father died. Fraud is fraud, no matter how you look at it. Mrs. Kirk (in my research) sounds like a real b***ch. My great grandfather Cary Wineland aka Bill Kirk, sounds like an interesting person and the theme "what comes around, goes around," seems to have happened to him in the end.
No comments:
Post a Comment