Bradley v. Pierce
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 568, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., Oct. T., 1895, No. 60, on verdict for defendants. Issue devisavit vel non.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 568, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., Oct. T., 1895, No. 60, on verdict for defendants. Issue devisavit vel non. Before PIemphill, J. The facts appear by the charge of the court below, which was in part as follows: Now, gentlemen of the jury, in this issue thus framed and sent into the common pleas for the purpose of determining the questions I have read, the plaintiffs here are Mr. Bradley, Mr. Harris, as guardian, and several others. The defendants are Thos. W. Pierce and E. Malin Hoopes. [It is incumbent upon the plaintiffs to satisfy you…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This issue, sent by the orphans’ court to the common pleas, was for trial by jury of six questions specified therein, the second of which is: “ Whether or not the said alleged codicil, dated August 15,1891, was executed by the said A. Taylor Hoopes?” Another is: “ Did A. Taylor Hoopes direct and dictate all of the provisions of the paper writing of January 27, 1888, and the codicil of August 15, 1891 ? ” As will be seen by reference to the others, they involve questions of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud and imposition,, as bearing on the execution as well as the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Jones EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1959