The Heirs Who Came for a Snohomish Subdivision — and Went Home Empty
Five years of litigation over half of a $40,000 estate ends in a demurrer: under the law of 1879, a dead wife's share of the community property belonged to her husband, and the people who bought lots in the Clay addition can keep their houses.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Snohomish, Jan. 27 — Special. — The case of the Haskell heirs vs. Elwell and Ford came up for hearing on demurrer Saturday before Judge Denny, and after the argument of counsel the court decided that there was no cause for action.
This case is one that has been talked of for the last five or six years in this county. The point of law raised by the attorneys for the plaintiffs is that the Haskell heirs were the owners of one-half interest in a large amount of real estate in this county, including the Clay farm, which adjoins Snohomish, and also the Clay addition, which has been improved by the building of some twenty or thirty residences upon it. Their claim grows out of the fact that their mother at the time of her death was a one-half owner in all the property, Mrs. Haskell having died in the year 1879 without having conveyed any of her interest in the property. Some time after Mrs. Haskell's death, Haskell, her husband, conveyed all of this property to various persons, including Messrs. Clay, Elwell and Ford. The position taken by the defendants' attorneys was that under the law of 1879, being the year of Mrs. Haskell's death, all of her interest in the community property went to the husband, and that the law under which the heirs could inherit from her did not take effect until the year 1887.
The property involved in this suit amounts to $40,000, and the suit has created considerable interest in this community, as a great many of our citizens have purchased lots of Mr. Clay in the addition laid out by him and built thereon residences. But from a careful examination of the law it will be found that the Haskell heirs have no interest in the property, that the entire property was the community property of Mr. and Mrs. Haskell, and that when Mrs. Haskell died all of her interest in the community property passed to the husband, and that he had full power and right to convey it.
“When Mrs. Haskell died all of her interest in the community property passed to the husband, and that he had full power and right to convey it.”
Washington is still a community-property state, and who owns what when a spouse dies remains one of the most consequential questions in any family's finances. In 1895 the answer turned on which year's statute applied to a woman who died in 1879 — and the practical result was that thirty households in a new addition kept their deeds. Every title search in Snohomish County still runs back through puzzles exactly like this one.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.