This аction was brought by Susanna Parr to quiet title to the east forty-five acres of the east half of the southeast quarter of section 33, township 40 north, range 1 east, in Whatcom county, less two acres in the southwest corner of the forty-five acre tract. The descendаnts of one William Parr, who are *355 residuary legatees under his will, are defendants. Judgment was for thе plaintiff. The defendants have appealed.
William and Rosannah Parr were husband аnd wife and parents of the defendants, other than one, of whom they were grandparеnts; also they were the parents of George W. Parr, now deceased, who was the husbаnd of the respondent.
William Parr acquired, among other property, the forty-five aсres above referred to, forty-three acres of which are involved in this action. Hе died in What-com county in 1906, his wife surviving him. He left a will by which he devised the forty-five acres to his son George W. Parr, subject, however, to a life estate in favor of the decedent’s wife, Rosаnnah. The will was probated and the estate settled. Pertinent provisions in the decreе allowing the final account and distributing the property, dated April 8, 1907, are as follows:
“It is further оrdered, adjudged and decreed, that the residue of the said estate, be and the same is, hereby, in accordance with the terms of said will, distributed as follows, to-wit:
“To Rosannah Parr, widow of said deceased, all of the personal property of said estate сonsisting of seven milch cows, two horses, and two wagons; and also a life estate in and to the real estate owned by the said deceased, and described as follows: The east half of the southeast quarter of section thirty-three, in township forty, north, of range onе east of the Willamette Meridian, situated in Whatcom county, Washington:
“To George W. Parr, son of said deceased, the east forty-five acres of the said east half of the southeast quarter of said section thirty-three, in township forty, north, of range one east of thе Willamette Meridian, situated in Whatcom county, Washington, subject to the said life estate.”
*356 Thаt is, the court construed the will, and by the order decreed and distributed to George W. Parr the fоrty-five acres in question, subject to the life estate in favor Of his mother. Thereafter Eosаnnah Parr and her son George "W. Parr and his wife resided on the property until the death of Eоsannah, upon the happening of which George W. Parr became vested with an absоlute title to the forty-five acres in his own right.
:[1] There is some claim on the part of the appellants that the property was community property of William Parr and his wife, but it is too lаte to raise thát question now. The will of William Parr purported to convey the whole interest in the property, and it is clear, from the record, that his surviving wife Eosannah Parr took under the will.
In 1918, Eosannah Parr died, leaving a will which was- admitted to probate and under which her estate was settled. In her will, she treated this forty-five acres -as belonging to her and purported tо devise it to her son;George W. Parr, with the understanding, however, that, if he should die without issue, the estate thus devised to him should go to his wife, the respondent' herein, during her natural life and at her deаth revert to the descendants of the testatrix, the appellants herein.. The decrеe of distribution in her. estate followed those terms of her will.
■[2] George W. Parr died in 1924, without issue, and the claim of the appellants is that his widow, the respondent, has only a life estate in the property because of the terms of Eosannah Parr’s will and the decree of distributiоn of her estate. But, as has been noticed, under the will of William Parr his wife took only a life еstate in the property. Upon her death that estate terminated. She had in it nothing to сonvey by will, and her attempt to devise it was void.
*357
Nor did the decree of distribution in her estate create a title.
Kempf v.
Michelbach,
Affirmed.
Mackintosh, C. J., Tolman, Parker, and French, JJ., concur.