Rawlings v. Berry
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; E. H. Wootton, Special Chancellor; 1. The only issues are: (1) Did Corley execute the will? And, if so, (2) Was he mentally capable of executing a will? The testimony shows that he did execute the will, thereby revoking all former wills. This will was executed in the latter part of 1910, or early in 1911. He was mentally capable.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; E. H. Wootton, Special Chancellor; 1. The only issues are: (1) Did Corley execute the will? And, if so, (2) Was he mentally capable of executing a will? The testimony shows that he did execute the will, thereby revoking all former wills. This will was executed in the latter part of 1910, or early in 1911. He was mentally capable. The instructions should have been limited to these two issues. 2. The instructions given for contestant state the law of the case accurately and clearly, so far as they go. But the court should have gone further and given those…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This case involves a contest over the' will of J. D. Corley, which was executed on September 20, 1895. This will was duly admitted to probate, and Mrs. Rawlings prosecuted an appeal to the circuit court from that order. Upon the trial anew in the circuit court, evidence was offered tending to show that, in the latter part of 1910 or the early part of 1911, Corley executed another will, thereby revoking his former will, but that this subsequent will had been lost or destroyed. On behalf of the proponents of the 1895 will, it was denied that any subsequent will was ever executed, and there was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Nunn v. LynchSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
3Cited by3 opinions
- Allnutt v. WoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
- Reed v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Harrell v. HarrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944