Legal Opinion

Dodson v. Maroney

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided April 7, 1983PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Two actions brought on behalf of Mae E. Askling were consolidated and heard in a Probate Court; one seeking money damages from the defendant Maroney for conversion of the funds of Askling, and the other seeking a determination that the will of Askling dated June 4, 1980, was invalid due to lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence. The action for conversion was originally brought by the trustee of the Mae E. Askling Trust, but after the trust was terminated, Charles Dodson, the guardian of Askling, was substituted. Askling was alive at the time the actions were brought in the Probate…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Billings v. FowlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
  2. LaChapelle v. United Shoe Machinery Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
  3. Brignati v. MedenwaldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  4. McNulty v. HoweMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  5. Brown v. SallingerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Feener v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
  2. Brockelman v. Western Surety Co.Massachusetts Superior Court · 2000
  3. Feener v. NEW ENGLAND TEL. & TELEGRAPH CO.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
  4. Lee v. LeeMassachusetts Superior Court · 2014
  5. Wilson v. Estate of ArceseMassachusetts Superior Court · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API