Elliott v. Krause

I too agree that there was no binding oral contract to make a will. However, I disagree with the construction of the will as reflected in the majority opinion.

The majority holds that the word “real” was inadvertently included in the text and ignores it. However, the elemental rule is that it is the language actually employed in a will that must control, not the language intended to be used.1 This is especially true where, as here, the overall facts of the case do not point to a clear pattern of disposition by the parties, making it impossible to ascertain their intent.

This will contains two…