Kerns v. Soxman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. Feigned issue in the name of John Kerns as plaintiff, and M.Soxman and C. Soxman defendants, from the Register’s Court of Westmoreland county, transmitted to the Court of Common Pleas for trial, where a case was stated for the opinion of the Court of Common Pleas, to be considered in nature of a special verdict.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. Feigned issue in the name of John Kerns as plaintiff, and M.Soxman and C. Soxman defendants, from the Register’s Court of Westmoreland county, transmitted to the Court of Common Pleas for trial, where a case was stated for the opinion of the Court of Common Pleas, to be considered in nature of a special verdict. It was admitted, that the writing produced, purporting to be the last will and testament of Christian Soxman, deceased, was in the handwriting of John Barnet, Esq., deceased, and that the name John Barnet, written as a subscribing witness to the same, was the proper…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
Decisions on the English statute reflect no light on our act of assembly. By the statute, wills are to be signed by the devisor, and attested and subscribed in his presence by three or four credible witnesses; without which they are to be utterly void. Hence, a question which was long agitated in the English courts, and finally settled by an act of parliament, whether the witnesses must be credible at the time of attesting. It was, however, not a question of competency, but of form; the doubt being not whether the witness were qualified to…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hart v. HeilnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- M'Ilroy v. M'IlroySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
- Carter v. TruemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1847
- Search's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850