Legal Opinion · Dissent

Harris Estate

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 5, 1944No. Appeals, 283 and 284; Appeal, 74Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Allen M. Stearne:

I am in complete disagreement with this decision.

Testator, by his will and codicil, in plain and unambiguous language, bequeathed to his widow a share in his estate as measured by the Pennsylvania Intestate Act of June 7, 1917, P. L. 429, 20 PS section 1. The majority reject this interpretation. They create a supposed ambiguity in the language of the codicil where none exists. They then reform the testamentary disposition. An implied intent is attributed to testator to disinherit his widow, with an added supposed expression of knowledge on his…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Kiebler v. McCutcheonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Chandler v. WoelpperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
  3. Yates's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Conner's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  5. Prime's PetitionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

24 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