Legal Opinion

Spiegelglass v. Spiegelglass

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided January 7, 1958PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*267The opinion oí the court was delivered by

Clapp, S. J. A. D.

This is an action for the probate of the will of Abraham B. Spiegelglass. The question of interest in the case is whether evidence of a statement made by him some time after he had, with a pencil, scratched out certain names in his will, may be admitted to show that at the time he did this, he had no intention to revoke the entire will. The Bergen County Court, Judge Vanderwart sitting, held that these pencil markings were not placed on the instrument animo revocandi, and accordingly it probated the instrument as originally executed.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mutual Life Insurance v. HillmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Throckmorton v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
  3. In Re Estate of BakhausIllinois Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Board of National Missions v. SherryIllinois Supreme Court · 1939

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. ScherzerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997
  2. State v. DowneyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986
  3. State v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
  4. State v. PruddenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986
  5. Casualty Insurance Co. of California v. SalinasTexas Supreme Court · 1960

7 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