{
  "id": 1373984,
  "name": "Security Bank & Trust Company v. Costen",
  "name_abbreviation": "Security Bank & Trust Co. v. Costen",
  "decision_date": "1925-07-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "173",
  "last_page": "176",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "169 Ark. 173"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "132 Ark. 575",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1576704
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/132/0575-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "146 Mass. 281",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mass.",
      "case_ids": [
        784115
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mass/146/0281-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "95 Ind. 248",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ind.",
      "case_ids": [
        1336829
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ind/95/0248-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "75 Pa. St. 220",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Pa.",
      "case_ids": [
        1036706
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/pa/75/0220-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "73 Ala. 238",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ala.",
      "case_ids": [
        5546709
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ala/73/0238-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "23 Ark. 166",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1866036
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/23/0166-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "59 N. Y. 574",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        521424
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/59/0574-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 340,
    "char_count": 5816,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.458,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.870502475968019e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7262091342004882
    },
    "sha256": "26ac208e0c256c7b384f5efa598624fcac0e13635130d07f3101335f1a32438b",
    "simhash": "1:fa154cd246a605f8",
    "word_count": 1008
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T23:00:38.667503+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Security Bank & Trust Company v. Costen."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "McCulloch, C. J.\nAppellee\u2019s decedent, W. C. Greathouse, died in Greene County, Arkansas; on March 12, 1923, leaving surviving his widow, Emily C. Great-house, and several children and leaving a last will and testament, by which he devised to his wife, Emily C., his lot and dwelling house in the city of Paragould \u201cfor and during her natural life, and at her death, if undisposed of, then to my heirs hereinafter named,\u201d and also bequeathed to her \u201call the household and kitchen furniture, beds and bedding, cooking utensils, etc., now used by us in keeping house and the sum of $135 in money. \u2019 \u2019 Directions were made in the will for the payment to a lodge of Odd Fellows the sum of $100 out of the proceeds of a life insurance policy, and the will contains a residuary clause devising and bequeathing the residue of the estate to the children and grandchildren of the testator. The will also contains a clause conferring power upon the devisee, Emily 0. Greathouse, to mortgage the property devised \u201cif necessary to raise money for her reasonable support and maintenance during her natural life.\u201d No appointment of an executor was made in the will.\nThe next day after the burial of deceased the widow, Plmily C. Greathouse, paid the necessary funeral expenses, amounting to $210. She died on October 12, 1923, and appellant was appointed administrator of her estate. The claim was presented by appellant for the estate of his decedent against the estate of W. 0. Great-house, appellee having been appointed administrator of that estate, and the claim was allowed and classified by the probate court, but on appeal to the circuit court the trial of the issues resulted in a judgment in favor of appellee and against appellant for the allowance of the claim.\nIt goes without question that the estate of a decedent is chargeable for the reasonable and necessary expenses of interment of the' body \u2014 a ceremonial interment in keeping with the circumstances and standing of the deceased when in life. The duty rests upon some of the living to see that the right of decent burial is provided, and from this duty springs a legal obligation of the decedent\u2019s estate to pay the expenses. Patterson v. Patterson, 59 N. Y. 574. If the person who incurs the expense or advances the money to pay it is not a mere volunteer who acts officiously and without interest in the estate of the decedent, the charge against the estate inures to his or her benefit. This principle was announced by this court in the case of Brearly v. Norris. 23 Ark. 166, and the principle has been recognized by many decisions in other States. Jenks v. Terrell, 73 Ala. 238; France\u2019s Estate, 75 Pa. St. 220; Brown v. Forst, 95 Ind. 248; In re Skillman\u2019s Estate, 146 Iowa St. 601; Constantinides v. Walsh, 146 Mass. 281. Under the circumstances of this case, it cannot be rightly said that the widow was a mere volunteer and acted officiously and without interest in paying the funeral expenses of her deceased husband. The payment was in settlement of the claim of the undertaker, which would have been a legal claim against the estate, and the act of the widow in making the payment was not a discharge of the obligation of the estate, but was a mere transfer of the obligation by way of subrogation to the widow. The last will and testament of the deceased husband did not cast upon the widow the burden of paying the debts of the estate, and \u00abhe was therefore under no obligation to pay the debts out of her own estate or out of the interest which she took under the will of her husband, for no such condition or burden was imposed upon her by the terms of the will. Wisner v. Richardson, 132 Ark. 575. Nor did the mere fact that the widow was authorized-in addition to her life estate in the real property devised to sell or mortgage the property in fee to raise the money for her maintenance create any obligation to pay the debts of the estate. She was entitled to enjoy the portion of the estate devised and bequeathed to her, without assuming the obligations to pay the debts, unless such obligation was imposed by the language of the will itself.\nThe judgment of the circuit court was therefore erroneous, and the same is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "McCulloch, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "M. P. Huddleston and Hamilton E. Little, for appellant.",
      "Jeff Bratton, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Security Bank & Trust Company v. Costen.\nOpinion delivered July 6, 1925.\n1. Executors and administrators \u2014 funeral expenses. \u2014 The estate \u25a0 of .a deeendent is chargeable with the reasonable and necessary-expenses of interment of the body, in keeping with his circumstances and standing when in life.\n2. Dead bodies1 \u2014 duty to provide burial. \u2014 The duty to provide a decent burial rests upon the living, and from this duty springs a legal obligation of the'decedent\u2019s estate to pay the expenses.\n3. Executors and administrators \u2014 burial expenses as charge.\u2014 If the person who incurs burial expenses or who advances money to pay therefor is not a mere volunteer who acts officiously and without interest in the estate of the deceased, the expense incurred on money* advanced for burial is a charge against the estate, which inures to the benefit of the person so incurring or advancing it.\n4. Executors and administrators \u2014 burial expenses \u2014 payment by widow. \u2014 Payment by a widow of the funeral expenses of her hsuband did not discharge the obligation of .the estate, but constituted a mere transfer of his obligation to her by way of subrogation.\n5. Wills \u2014 liability of devisee to pay debts of estate.' \u2014 The widow of decedent was entitled to enjoy the portion of her husband\u2019s estate devised to her without assuming any obligation to pay the debts of the estate, where the will did not impose any such obligation upon her.\nAppeal from Green Circuit Court; W. W. Bandy; Judge;\nreversed.\nM. P. Huddleston and Hamilton E. Little, for appellant.\nJeff Bratton, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0173-01",
  "first_page_order": 193,
  "last_page_order": 196
}