Legal Opinion

Seymour v. Biehslich

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 1, 2007No. 07-63PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tom Glaze, Justice.

This appeal asks our court to deter-ice. constitutes a will contest for purposes of an in terrorem, or “no contest,” clause in a will. Mr. Floyd Ray Davis, Sr., died testate on May 18, 2002. On May 21, 2002, Mr. Davis’s daughter, appellee Gladys Biehslich, filed a petition for probate of will and appointment of personal representative. Biehslich’s proffered will was dated May 6, 2002; after making a few specific bequests, the will bequeathed the remainder of Mr. Davis’s property in equal shares to his seven children and the children of his one deceased son. In addition, the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Norman v. NormanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  2. Bullock v. BarnesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  3. McAdams v. McAdamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  4. McLane Southern, Inc. v. DavisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  5. Craig v. CarrigoSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Abraham v. BeckSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2015
  2. Estate of Pedro v. ScheelerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Hetman v. SchwadeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009
  4. Autry v. BeckhamCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2014
  5. Hamm v. HammCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2013

21 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