Legal Opinion
Hitchcock v. Taylor
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided February 20, 1894PublishedCited by 13 opinions
Mandamus. Eelator applied for mandamus to compel respondent to vacate an order setting aside an order disallowing a claim filed against an estate, and granting a rehearing, etc. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, C. J.
P. A. Skinner died leaving a will which contained a bequest to his wife of $2,000. Claims against the estate were heard by the judge of probate. The widow presented the following antenuptial agreement:
“Burton, January 24, 1886.
“I hereby agree to pay Mary A. Kimball, if she becomes my wife, at my death, $2,000, it to be paid out of my insurance; if in any event said insurance is not sufficient, it to be paid out of my property situated in Burton.
“P. A. Skinner.”
The judge of probate admitted testimony tending to show that the purpose of the bequest made by the will was the performance of this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Brick's EstateNew York Surrogate's Court · 1862
- In re the Estate of HudsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Besancon v. BrownsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- People v. Justices of the SessionsNew York Supreme Court · 1799
3Cited by13 opinions
- Andrada v. KelseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- State v. RossSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
- In Re Quinney's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- Rodgers v. HuntleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- State ex rel. Worsham v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1923
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.