Majority
Headnote
t. Appeal — Questions Review able.The judgment appealed from must be affirmed. It properly directs a sale of the property affected. It is perfectly obvious, under the proofs presented, that an actual partition could not be made so as to do justice to all of the parties interested. Under the judgment appealed from, the plaintiff is entitled to an undivided one-fourth interest, the appellant individually, and as.sole heir at law of Samuel R. Lawrence, who has died since the appeal was taken, is entitled to an undivided one-half interest, and the remaining one-fourth interest is held by Gaines Lawson as executor and trustee under the last will and testament of Laura Lawson, deceased, in trust to pay the income therefrom, one 'half to the defendant Katherine L. Neumann during her life, and the other half to Lawrence M. Lawson during his life. The defendants Katherine L. Neumann, Lawrence M. Lawson, and the infant defendant, Katherine R. Neumann, have an interest, either vested or contingent, in this remainder; but it is immaterial whether or not such interest be correctly stated in the judgment, inasmuch as none of them have appealed therefrom, and this part of the judgment in no way affects or concerns the appellant. It is sufficient to say that a purchaser upon the sale will obtain good title, inasmuch as there are now before the court all of the parties who at the present time have any interest in the subject-matter of the sale. Sections 1557, 1577, Code Civ. Proc. The fact that there may hereafter be unborn children who might have an interest in the one-fourth interest, or some part thereof now held by Gaines Lawson as executor and trustee, could not affect the title, because “the persons first entitled to which, or virtual representatives whereof,” are parties to the action. Subdivision 3, § 1557, Code Civ. Proc. The only appellant is Edgar V. Lawrence.
■The judgment appealed from, therefore, is affirmed, with costs to the respondent.