Iddings v. Iddings
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
•In Error. THIS was a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas to f Union County, in which a feigned issue was tried, to termine the validity of a writing purporting-to be the last * _ • ° 1 • 0 frill and testament of Henry Iddings,, deceased. • The tiff having given evidence in support of the will by the oaths of the two subscribing witnesses, one of whom was Jonas Candor, the scrivener who drew it, the defendants offered to prove on tHe cross examination of the said…
Read the full summary
•In Error. THIS was a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas to f Union County, in which a feigned issue was tried, to termine the validity of a writing purporting-to be the last * _ • ° 1 • 0 frill and testament of Henry Iddings,, deceased. • The tiff having given evidence in support of the will by the oaths of the two subscribing witnesses, one of whom was Jonas Candor, the scrivener who drew it, the defendants offered to prove on tHe cross examination of the said Candor, that through ignorance he had drawh' the will in suph á maimer as to contradict the intention oí-the'testator. "The…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered’by
Tilghman C. J.
This may be a very unfortunate mistake for some of the children of the testator, but I am clearly of "opinion that the evidence was not admissible.- Our law requires that wills should be in writing, and proved by two- witnesses. But if the writing is to' be contradicted by parol evidence, the object of the law will be defeated and all certainty destroyed. It is very common, for scriveners to make mistakes, particularly where they make use of technical words, which they are fond of doing. But, if these mistakes were to be corrected by the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- M'Dermott v. United States InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817
3Cited by2 opinions
- Stephen v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1848
- Stub's Use v. StubSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846