| OCR Text |
Show his will, made the University of Utah Dr. Park, under Executor‘s rt all beneficiary and directed the Executor'b conve sole Final Hepor -bthe able funds, and to transfer on Dr. Park's Estate the assets of the estate into avail and deliver the same to the University of Utah.. nt,Dr. As shown by the first Inventory and Appraiseme and personal Park left an estate in Utah consisting of real property, as follows; Real eState ............... $25,885.00 Personal PrOperty ........ Cash on Hand .............. 8,506.40 8,525.55 $42,916.75 All of the above real estate is located in Salt Lake City with the exception of a one-third interest in a parcel .of real estate located in Davis County. As you no doubt are aware, shortly after the Doctor's death, one Annie F.A. Hilton, asserting that she was the widow of Doctor Park, filed claims in the District Court of Salt ‘ Lake County, alleging that she was entitled to one-third of all the real estate of which decedent died siezed. : Issue was joined and the question determined in the case known as Hilton In that case Hon. waldemar Van Cott and Hon. vs. Roylance. Frank Pierce, both then Regents of the University, tendered their legal services gratuitously in resisting the claim of Mrs. Hilton. The case was tried in the District Court and She appealed to the judgment rendered against Hrs. Hilton. Supreme Court, but notwithstanding the most able presentation "1 - of the case by Messrs. Van Cott and Pierce before said Court, the judgment of the lower court was reversed and Mrs. Hilton was declared to be the lawful Widow of the said decedent. Thereafter, and in pursuance of said decree, commissioners were duly appointed by the Court to partition, set apart and award Mrs. Hilton a one-third interest in all the real property Said report of said estate, located within the State of Utah. was duly confirmed by the Court. Hrs. Hilton then petitioned the court for a family allowance, which was resisted by the Hrs. Hilton Executor and denied by the District Court. appealed this case and the judgment of the lower Court was She then instituted a number of cases to recover affirmed. a one-third interest in value of all the properties alienated by Dr. Park during his life time. The Executor was duly notified by each of the parties against whom action was brought to come in and defend the title under the warranties of the deeds given by Dr. Park, which the Executor did. These actions were all tried in theDistrict Court upon their merits and ‘ judgments were rendered in all cases in favor of Mrs.'Hilton. at the instance of the Executor, these cases were all ap ealed p were ' t 0 the SuDr em e C our t and th e judgments of the lower courts -* .r reversed by the Supreme Court, deciding in favor of appellants, T7 and adversely to the contention of Mrs. Hilton. of all of the actions involved in the estate is herewith submitted. ‘ A brief summariff ' lltigatlon Of the Park |
