Legal Opinion

Finley v. Young

California Supreme Court

Decided November 7, 1967No. L. A. No. 29255PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.

On January 18, 1963, a holographic instrument dated July 7, 1950, was admitted to probate as the last will of Augusta C. Callahan. Within six months after probate (see Prob. Code, § 380) Harriett A. Finley and Josie M. Hennenberg1 filed their contest of the will on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity; undue influence and fraud exercised by Margaret C. Young, decedent’s niece, guardian, principal beneficiary and one of the proponents of her will; and lack of due execution of said document. The last ground of contest was presented to the court as a separate issue, decision of other…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Estate of LancesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Estate of LingenfelterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Jamison v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Berger v. LaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Estate of FritschiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Elmore v. American Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Cervantez v. J. C. Penney Co.California Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Dailey v. Los Angeles Unified School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Miller v. Los Angeles County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Putensen v. Clay Adams, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1970

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