MARTIN v. BLASINGAME

MARTIN v. BLASINGAME
1955 OK 302
289 P.2d 381
Case Number: 36320
Decided: 10/25/1955
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

ARTHUR MARTIN AND J.L. HUNNICUT, AND RAY GATHRIGHT, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF WADE A. BLASINGAME, DEC., AND JOHN ROGERS McDOWELL, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
ROSA A. BLASINGAME AND THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF PAWHUSKA, OKLAHOMA, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR.

Syllabus

¶0 The intent of the Legislature in

[289 P.2d 382]

Appeal from the District Court of Osage County; Hugh C. Jones, Judge.

Appeal by the beneficiaries and executor under the will of Wade A. Blasingame, deceased, from an order of the District Court of Osage County affirming an order of the County Court providing for continued payments of family allowance to the widow, Rosa A. Blasingame after entry of order of distribution of the assets of the estate. Reversed with directions.

Hamilton & Kane, Gray & Palmer, Pawhuska, for plaintiffs in error.

R.R. Linker, Tulsa, for defendants in error.

HUNT, J.

¶1 This is an appeal by the executor and the beneficiaries under the will of Wade A. Blasingame, deceased, from an order of the District Court of Osage County affirming an order of the County Court providing for continued payments of family allowance to the widow, Rosa A. Blasingame.

¶2 The will of Wade A. Blasingame, deceased, was admitted to probate on February 15, 1952. Application was made by the widow for a family allowance to be paid from the assets of the estate and an oral order was entered ordering the executors to pay her the sum of $200 per month as family allowance. On January 8, 1953, the principal beneficiaries under the will filed a motion to discontinue this family allowance. Upon hearing the court ratified the previous payment of the family allowance under the oral order theretofore entered and ordered that the motion to discontinue the allowance be continued for final hearing to July 14, 1953, and in the meantime directed the executor to continue the payments of the allowance until that date. On April 9, 1953, the executor filed his final account and petition for distribution of the assets of the estate in accordance with the terms of the will. The widow filed her election to take as an heir at law rather than under the terms of the will and attacked an antenuptial contract entered into between her and the deceased on the grounds of fraud and coercion. On June 2, 1953, the county court, after hearing, entered an order denying the petition of the widow to take as an heir at law, upholding the terms of the antenuptial contract, and distributing the assets of the estate in accordance with the terms of the will. The widow perfected her appeal from this order to the District Court of Osage County. On July 2, 1953, the principal beneficiaries under the will filed a supplemental motion to discontinue the payment of the family allowance to the widow, stating that all the assets of the estate had been distributed under the order [289 P.2d 383] of distribution of June 2, 1953, and there were no other assets; that there was no order providing payment of the allowance beyond July 14, 1953, and that after the order of distribution the county court lost jurisdiction to make any further order for payment of the allowance. On July 14, 1953 the county court heard the original and supplemental motions to discontinue the family allowance and entered its order providing for future payments of family allowance at the rate of $150 per month until further order of the court. The executor and the principal beneficiaries under the will appealed from such order to the District Court.

¶3 Upon hearing of the widow's appeal from the order of distribution the District Court affirmed the order of the County Court upholding the antenuptial contract and distributing the estate in accordance with the terms of the will. Upon appeal here we affirmed the judgment of the District Court, No. 36,422, Blasingame v. Gathright, Okl.,

¶4 Appellants contend that after the County Court entered its order distributing the assets of the estate on June 2, 1953, it was without jurisdiction on July 14, 1953, to enter an order continuing the family allowance, since the order of distribution was conclusive subject only to being reversed, set aside, or modified on appeal,

¶5 In Salter v. Continental Casualty Co., 194 Okl. 26,

¶6 Reversed, with directions to terminate the widow's allowance as of July 14, 1953.

¶7 WILLIAMS, V.C.J., and CORN, DAVISON, HALLEY, BLACKBIRD and JACKSON, JJ., concur.