- 20 -
and Allene W. Stone; Rosalie Morris and E.E.
Stone, IV shall each receive one-fourth (�)
of Cedar Mountain. Notwithstanding the fore-
going, neither Mary Fraser, Jack Stone [Eu-
gene Earle Stone, IV], nor Rosalie Morris
shall be entitled to receive more than one-
fourth (�) of the total value of the net
estates after estate taxes. The parties will
use their best efforts to agree on the dimen-
sions and appurtenances to the same prior to
the final Court approval of the settlement.
* * * * * * *
Any disagreement over the provisions in this
Section VI shall be submitted to binding
arbitration before the American Arbitration
Association or before an arbitrator appointed
by the Probate Court of South Carolina.
* * * * * * *
VII. IMPLEMENTATION AND JURISDICTION
* * * * * * *
B. CONTINUING JURISDICTION
The Probate Court * * * shall maintain
continuing jurisdiction to resolve any dis-
putes which shall arise during the implemen-
tation and enforcement of this settlement
agreement. * * *
The 1994 plan for settlement also provided in part as
follows:
THE FOUR CHILDREN UNDERSTAND THAT ANY RESOLUTION OF THE
ESTATE ISSUES MUST INCLUDE A COMPLETELY DEFINITIVE
APPROACH TO THE DIVISION OF THE ASSETS OF THE PARENT’S
[sic] ESTATES. THE SETTLEMENT SHALL NOT BE FINALIZED
UNTIL THE CHILDREN HAVE DETERMINED THE WILLINGNESS OF
THEIR FATHER TO ADDRESS THESE ESTATE ISSUES AND ANY
CHILD MAY REFUSE TO FINALIZE THE AGREEMENT IF E.E.
STONE, III REFUSES TO MAKE THE CHANGES TO HIS ESTATE
PLAN PROVIDED FOR HEREIN. * * *
The parties in the litigation among the children included the
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011