In Re McGraw's Estate

This court did not hold in the former opinion in this case (228 Mich. 1) that an implied revocation might be- presumed from the mere fact of divorce. After referring to the holdings in Lansing v. Haynes, 95 Mich. 16 (35 Am. St. Rep. 545), and Wirth v. Wirth, 149 Mich. 687, it was said:

“It is quite evident that in the two Michigan oases there is no such holding, because the element of settlement was present in both cases.”

The conclusion on which the action of the court was based was thus stated:

“I am of the opinion that the conditions and circumstances attending the decree of divorce are…