Cook v. Estate of Seeman
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Jack Holt, Jr., Chief Justice.
This case presents the novel issue of whether an exclusionary clause in a will lacking a residuary clause controls intestate property held by the testatrix. We hold that it does not and reverse the findings of the Probate Court.
On May 7, 1987, the decedent, Ruby Seeman, executed a will distributing her assets to her husband, brother and three surviving children. The will, which does not have a residuary clause, fails to dispose of her residence, but it does explicitly exclude the widow and children of her late son, Marion Seeman, from inheriting any part of her…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mockbee v. DunnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Quattlebaum v. the Simmons National Bank, Admr.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1945
- Kidd v. SparksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
- Gifford v. Estate of GiffordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
- Kimley v. WhittakerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Harrison v. HarrisonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2003
- Craig v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2018
- McClain v. HardyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002