Casey v. Hanley
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County. Lincoln S. Church, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWilbur, J.
This is a contest over the will of the deceased, on the ground that the same was not executed as required by law. The will having been admitted to probate, contestants appeal, basing their appeal upon three grounds: (1) That the subscribing witnesses did not sign the attesting clause to said will in the presence of each other; (2) That the finding of the trial court that the subscribing witness, Jennie Kinsman, signed the attesting clause while in the presence of the testatrix is not supported by the evidence; (3) That the finding that the subscribing witnesses signed at the request of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re Estate of SilvaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Hoysradt v. . KingmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- In Re Estate of CullbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Estate of ToomesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Travis v. StrausCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Estate of PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- In Re Estate of RelphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Smith v. SpauldingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Estate of JacobsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Estate of GreeneArizona Supreme Court · 1932
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.