Legal Opinion · Dissent

Veditz v. Athey

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided July 13, 1965No. [No. 321, September Term, 1964.]Published

1Dissent

HornEy, J.,

filed the following dissenting opinion, in which Prescott, C. J., and Sybert, J., concurred.

The majority, by applying a rule of construction rather than the process of interpretation in construing the last will and testament of Matilda Held, deceased, and the codicils thereto, have, in my opinion, unwittingly rewritten the testamentary disposition of a one-half interest in the home of the testatrix. To use as apt colloquialism, they have put the cart before the horse.

The interpretation of a will involves the process of ascertaining, from a reading of all the testamentary writings…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Albert v. AlbertCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1888
  2. Thomas v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1891
  3. Johns Hopkins University v. PinckneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1881
  4. Syfer v. DolbyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1943
  5. Judik v. TraversCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1944

4 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