Legal Opinion

Volkmann v. Vinson

California Supreme Court

Decided November 12, 1935No. S. F. 15250PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConrey, J.

On the 16th day of December, 1930, the decedent Emilie D. Schnoor, executed a holographic will wherein she gave and bequeathed to Evelyn H. Vinson “all my real and personal property”. On the 20th day of October, 1932, she executed a second holographic testamentary document, which we may call the second will, and which contained several bequests of personal property and gave the residue again to Mrs. Vinson. The estate included property in addition to that disposed of by the specific gifts made in the second will. The second will did not contain any express revocation of the first will.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Wollesen v. CarlsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Estate of DanfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Crane v. Young Women's Christian Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. Estate of O'BrienCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  3. Smith v. DavisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Estate of HeringCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  5. Crane v. Young Women's Christian Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

1 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