WILL CONTESTED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 138, 14 June 1938, Page 8

WILL CONTESTED.

HUSBAND'S CLAIM. '

SHARE IN THE HOME.

ASSESSING COMMON ASSETS,

A claim against the Public Trustee for possession of assets in the estate of the late Catherine Ann Crichton was made before Mr. Justice Reed in the Supreme Court to-day by William John Crichton (Mr. Fitzlierbert), a contractor, of Eden vale Road, Mount Eden, as" the widower of the late Mrs. Crichton.

Plaintiff states in his claim that ho was living with the testatrix at the time of her death, occupying a house wliich was in lier name and in which he was given a life interest. He further stated" that the title was in his wife's name, hut he had discharged a second mortgage amounting to £485 with his own money, and that lie had paid for the furniture, which he valued at £358 and for which he made claim. He further claimed for costs of the action. • Mr. Leary, who appeared for the Public Trustee, raised the issue of the Statute of Limitations, to apply to any sums in the amounts claimed which had been advanced to the estate more than six years prior to Mrs. Cricliton's death in Januar3 r , 1907, and counsel for plaintiff agreed to this arrangement. An Unexpected Will. In outlining the claim, Mr. Fitzhcrbert said that both Mr. and Mrs. Crichton had been twice married, and at the time of tlieir second marriage he had a son who frequently stayed with them, while the late Mrs. Crichton had two sons who did not appear until a couple of years before her death. Plaintiff's complaint was that in 1929 he and his wife made reciprocal wills, each leaving a life interest to the other in their common property, and an equal distribution thereafter between their three sons, and that later Mrs. Crichton changed her will, in 1935, cutting out any eventual interest by plaintiff's son. Tt was not until Mrs. Crich ton's death that plaintiff was aware of the change of her will. | and he was then unable to find the first j will made by her. It' was only after | an intensive search that he found the | will made by himself, though both wills | had been put away and kept in the same i place for some years..

In respect to the property, it was [purchased on a deposit of £150 paid by Mrs. Cricliton out of £310 received from her mother's estate, and there were first and second mortgages on it. Plaintiff claimed that he had paid interest and principal at 30/ per week, amounting to £455 on the second mortgage and on improvements to the property. He also claimed that he had paid for all the furniture, valued, at £385. Position of Public Trustee. Plaintiff gave evidence on the lines of counsel's statement, relating to payments made by him for furniture and for interest and reduction of principal on the second mortgage.

In reply to his Honor it was stated by Mr. Leary that tlie Public Trustee [desired that the plaintiff should have all lie -was entitled to, hut his claim amounted to so mucli that it came practically to tlie full amount of the estate, and would consequently leave nothing for the testatrix's children. Consequently the Trustee had to test the claim so far as was possible.

In, cross-examination toy Mr. Leary. the witness said lie mentioned to the Public Trustee his "wife's former will, "but he didn't mention his own will, and an agreement between them when they made the wills. "Witness admitted that j there had been a disagreement between [his wife and his son. The case is proceeding.