Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In Re Smith's Estate

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1944No. Docket No. 54, Calendar No. 42,609Published

1Concurrence

I concur in the result but do not agree that the question before us is whether the testimony as to exhibit 6 (the writing left with the nurse) and the circumstances of its execution is admissible. The issue is as to the effect of this evidence, not its admissibility. Testimony of that nature is admissible for any one of four purposes: (1) To show whether it is in itself a testamentary disposition (In re Cosgrove's Estate, 290 Mich. 258 [125 A.L.R. 410]); (2) whether it is a codicil (In reHenry's Estate, 263 Mich. 410); (3) a revocation of a former will (Act No. 288, chap. 2, § 9, Pub. Acts…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Barnewall v. MurrellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  2. Turner v. ScottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
  3. Merrill v. BoalSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1926
  4. In re Kennedy's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  5. In Re Cosgrove's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1939

2 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