Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Bernard

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided August 4, 2014No. Nos. 69608-4-I; 69702-1-IPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCox, J.

¶1 A court’s paramount duty in construing a testamentary instrument is to give effect to the maker’s intent.1 We determine that intent from the instrument as a whole.2 Similarly, “[t]he ‘touchstone of contract interpretation is the parties’ intent.’ ”3 We follow “the objective manifestation theory of contracts, imputing an intention corresponding to the reasonable meaning of the words used.”4

¶2 Generally, a personal representative of an estate has the right to appeal an adverse decision in a will contest, as it is the duty of the executor to take all legitimate steps to uphold the…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Bostain v. Food Exp., Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Bostain v. Food Express, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Yakima Fruit & Cold Storage Co. v. Central Heating & Plumbing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1972
  4. State v. TaylorWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  5. State v. TaylorWashington Supreme Court · 2003

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Sloans v. BerryCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
  2. In Re The Matter Of The Estate Of: Bert W. HookCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
  3. Wicks v. PapaleoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
  4. Estate Of Sven H. Elstrom, V.elisabeth Ellstrom-bauerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  5. Guardianship Of Leon JensenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015

8 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