Legal Opinion

Futterlieb v. Wight

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1923PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVinje, C. J.

The question raised by the appeal is whether the witnesses, or any of them, signed in the presence of the testator as required by sec. 2282, Stats. Were this a' case of first construction of the statute it might well be that the facts bring the attestation within the statute, giving N to the word “presence” the broad liberal meaning that some courts have given it. But our court in an early day in the case of Will of Downie, 42 Wis. 66, decided in 1877, held that the witnesses must subscribe in a place where the testator, if not blind, may, if he so desires, see them sign, and *244that the statute…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Will of MeurerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Cook v. WinchesterMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Riggs v. RiggsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
  4. In re Downie's WillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Poindexter's Adm'r v. AlexanderCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1939
  2. Graffin v. HulettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Lutheran Children's Friend Society v. HaugkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API