Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Eimers v. North Idaho Children's Home

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1976No. 12145Published

1ConcurrenceBistline, Justice

(specially concurring).

The majority opinion does justice to the testator’s intent as that intent is manifest from the unambiguous provisions of his will, I.C. § 15-2-603, In re Corwin’s Estate, 86 Idaho 1, 383 P.2d 339 (1963), as it was written. The will of Mr. Kerlee, the decedent, does contain “survival” language.

*8I agree also that the Ohio authority cited by respondent is not, and ought not to be, controlling here. The Ohio statute and our statute are dissimilar. Our statute is wholly premised on common accident or common disaster situations, as explained below. Ohio, prior to the present…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In Re the Estates of DavenportIdaho Supreme Court · 1958
  2. State v. BowmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Bruner v. CorwinIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
  4. In Re Corwin's EstateIdaho Supreme Court · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API