Schaefer v. Ziebell
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtNelson, J.
In reaching the conclusion just mentioned, the court, it seems to us, was dominated by equitable rather than legal considerations. That a will does not divide an ' estate equitably among those who are the natural objects of the testator’s bounty is not of controlling importance in determining the question of undue influence. Such a will is not to be considered in the light of what the court, in a particular case, deems just or unjust, but rather in the light of what the testator really desired. If a will expresses the *410desires and wishes of the testator and was properly executed by one having…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- MacKall v. MacKallSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Will of Ball v. BostonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Vance v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Chase v. AmadonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
- Clark v. MuellerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Patterson v. JensenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
- In Re Rowland's EstateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1945
- Kuehn v. KuehnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- William L. Burkhalter v. Steven P. BurkhalterSupreme Court of Iowa · 2013
- Gevers v. SchwarzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.