Glasscock v. Smither & Hunt
Court of Appeals of Virginia
This was an appeal from a judgment of the District Court, declaring, that a writing purporting to be the last will of George Glasscock deceased, was not in' fact his last will: because, “ there was produced at the same time, another writing, purporting to be the last will and testament of the said deceased; which appeared to have been legally executed.”
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a judgment of the District Court, declaring, that a writing purporting to be the last will of George Glasscock deceased, was not in' fact his last will: because, “ there was produced at the same time, another writing, purporting to be the last will and testament of the said deceased; which appeared to have been legally executed.” The writing sought to he proved, as the last will of the deceased, was offered for probat in the District Court on the 6th of September, 1796; and contains several pecuniary legacies with a devise of all the residue of his estate to his son…
1Opinion of the Court
PENDLETON, President,
after stating the case delivered the resolution of the Court:
That the will was good as to the personal estate; it being sufficiently proved to pass chattels. That it was a revocation of the former will, as to the personalty; and ought to have been admitted to record. Consequently, that the District Court erred in rejecting it, and that their judgment was to be reversed.
The judgment was as follows, “ The Court is of opinion that the writing aforesaid ought to be established as the last will of the said George Glasscock deceased, notwithstanding the existence of a will…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Bates v. HolmanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1809
- Bates v. HolmanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1809
- Bates v. HolmanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1809
- Redford's Administrator v. PeggySupreme Court of Virginia · 1828
- Redford's Administrator v. PeggySupreme Court of Virginia · 1838
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.