Legal Opinion · Dissent

Estate of Taylor

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 5, 1978No. 122Published

1DissentManderino, Justice

I dissent. The majority has done a beautiful job of weaving one technicality after another into a tapestry of injustice lacking in both reason and common sense.

In the second paragraph of his will testator left an undivided interest in land to appellant. It is well-settled that a will speaks as of the time of death, and at the time of his death testator had an interest in the land as he described. Moreover, it is also well-settled that all parts of a will are to be given effect if reasonably possible. Testator, without any question, made a testamentary gift to appellant, and at the time of his…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Houston EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  2. Bulger v. Wilderman and PleetSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. Randal v. Jersey Mortgage Investment Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. Carter EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  5. Whiteside's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API