descendants.
When any estate is devised or bequeathed to any child or other relation of the testator, and the devisee or legatee dies before the testator, leaving lineal descendants, such descendants take the estate so given by the will, in the same manner as the devisee or legatee would have done had he survived the testator. R.L. 1910, Sec. 8376; Laws 1945, p. 414, Sec. 1. R.L.1910, § 8376; Laws 1945, p. 414, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases, 1956–2006 · leading case:
Dean v. Moore, 380 P.2d 934 (Okla. 1962).
Dean v. Moore, 380 P.2d 934 (Okla. 1962).
· cites it 3× “” The referred to Section 8922 is found at 84 O.S.1961 § 142, and is inapplicable to the instant case (although the deceased residuary devisee was .”
Solomon v. Farris, 865 P.2d 1275 (Okla. Civ. App. 1993).
· cites it 2× “” Having so determined, the Trial Court further held, pursuant to 84 O.S. § 142, Nieces and Nephews each entitled to an equal share of the one-fifth interest in Decedent’s estate devised to Brother.”
Rose v. Krames, 527 P.2d 211 (Okla. Civ. App. 1974).
· cites it 3× “1971 § 177 reads: “If a devisee or legatee dies during the lifetime of the testator, the testamentary disposition to him fails, unless an intention appears to substitute some other in his place, except as provided in Section 8922 [84 O.S.1971 § 142].” As previously shown herein…”
Hulett v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. in Clinton, 1998 OK 21, 956 P.2d 879.
· cites it 2× “[9] In that Jason disclaims reliance on our anti-lapse statute [84 O.S.1991, § 142] to support his position in this case (See page 8 of his February 27, 1996 trial court brief), we have no occasion to delineate its application or non-application on disposition of the personalty…”
Ruotolo v. Tietjen, 890 A.2d 166 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006).
“1-09-05 (1996); Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 84, § 142 (West 1990); 20 Pa.”
Matter of Est. of Baxter, 798 P.2d 644 (Okla. Civ. App. 1990).
“Section 8922 was subsequently renumbered as 84 O.S.1981, § 142, which provides: When any estate is devised or bequeathed to any child or other relation of the testator, and the devisee or legatee dies before the testator, leaving lineal descendants, such descendants take the…”
In Re Est. of Daniels, 401 P.2d 493 (Okla. 1965).
“The fallacy of appellant’s second contention lies in the fact that they are apparently reading into 84 O.S.1961, § 142, on which such contention must surely rely, something that is not there.”
Hardy v. Carnes, 294 P.2d 551 (Okla. 1956).
“The situation arising out of the fact that Elmer Brixey died prior to death of testatrix is covered by statute 84 O.S. § 142. He left six children, who take under this statute in the same manner as the de-visee, their father, would have taken had he survived the testatrix.”
Beattie v. Trust Co. of Oklahoma, 828 P.2d 997 (Okla. Civ. App. 1992).
“The exception refers to 84 O.S.1991 § 142, which also provides: When any estate is devised or bequeathed to any child or other relation of the testator, and the devisee or legatee dies before the testator, leaving lineal descendants, such descendants take the estate so given by…”
Thomas v. Worsham, 859 P.2d 1134 (Okla. Civ. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “Appellee contended in the trial court that the gift and devise to Margie lapsed when she predeceased Decedent; and, that the third paragraph shows Decedent’s intent to prevent her lineal descendants from receiving the residual estate pursuant to 84 O.S.1991 § 142. 2 Margie…”
Est. of Kinnamon v. Kinnamon, 837 P.2d 927 (Okla. Civ. App. 1992).
“However, when Lucille’s son, Floyd, predeceased her, 84 O.S.1981, § 142 became applicable, which provides: *929 When any estate is devised or bequeathed to any child or other relation of the testator, and the devisee or legatee dies before the testator, leaving lineal…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.