## Facts

- Thorwald Hegstad died on January 23, 1945, owning the real property at issue.
- His estate was administered on the assumption he died intestate, and the administrator was finally discharged on August 14, 1946.
- On November 30, 1946, Hegstad’s heirs-at-law conveyed the property for \$12,000 to Louis and Gudrun Berland.
- On February 8, 1947, the Berlands conveyed the property for \$13,000 to Theodore J. Jankowski and others, who took possession.
- About six months later, Charles J. Eckland discovered a receipt revealing the existence and location of Hegstad’s will.
- On December 10, 1947, the will was admitted to probate, almost three years after death and more than a year after the heirs’ conveyance.
- The will devised an undivided one-half interest in the property to Eckland and the other one-half to Garman Hegstad, an heir who had participated in the prior conveyance.
- Eckland claimed the probate of the will vested title in the devisees as of the testator’s death, rendering the heirs’ conveyance void.
- Defendants asserted they were purchasers for value without notice of the will and that probate was required for the will to affect title.

## Issues

1. Whether a later-discovered and later-probated will can divest title acquired by bona fide purchasers for value from heirs-at-law after a judicial determination of intestacy and completion of estate administration.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed dismissal of Eckland’s partition complaint.
- The court held that title obtained by a bona fide purchaser from heirs-at-law, following a judicial determination of intestacy and closing of the estate, is not divested by a subsequently discovered will later admitted to probate.
- The court treated defendants as purchasers for value without notice who relied on the probate record and completed administration.

## Legal Principles

- In Illinois, a will is not effective to pass title until it has been admitted to probate.
- The relation-back doctrine cannot be applied to defeat intervening rights of bona fide purchasers who acquired title from heirs after a judicial intestacy determination.
- Public policy favors stability and finality of land titles derived from judicially supervised probate proceedings; equity does not permit divesting innocent purchasers who relied on the record.

## Conclusion

The court protected defendants’ title because they purchased for value without notice after an intestacy adjudication and completed administration; a later-probated will could not retroactively invalidate the heirs’ conveyance or support Eckland’s requested partition.


Eckland v. Jankowski, 407 Ill. 263, 95 N.E.2d 342 (Ill. 1950)