Matter of Estate of Peters
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
HANDLER, J.
This case requires our determination of whether a will can be admitted to probate despite the fact that it lacked the signatures of two witnesses, as prescribed by the statute, N.J.S.A. 3B:3-2, governing the formal requirements for the execution of a will. The Superior Court, Law Division, ordered that the will be probated, despite the absence of the signatures of witnesses; it held that under the circumstances allowing a witness to sign was a proper exercise of its equitable powers. The Appellate Division reversed, ruling that literal…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Dacunzo v. EdgyeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1955
- Succession of RousselSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1979
- In Re Mikeska EstateMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
- Rogers v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- In Re Estate of FlickerNebraska Supreme Court · 1983
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Gonzalez v. SatrusteguiCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1994
- Matter of Estate of RoyalSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
- Matter of Estate of BraniganSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
- In Re the Probate of the Alleged Will of RanneySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1991
- Spelius v. HollonIdaho Supreme Court · 2006
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.