Watson v. Riley
Nebraska Supreme Court
Appeal from the district court for Pierce county: An-son A. Welch, Judge.
1DissentSedgwick, J.
The office of the court in such case is to determine the meaning of the will; that is, the true intent of the testatrix. The case of Fauber v. Keim, 85 Neb. 217, cited in the majority opinion, also depended upon the intention of the testator, and it was said: “The decision on this point must be controlled by the intention of testator as disclosed by his entire will.” This is the only respect in which that case is similar to the one at bar, and I must suppose, that it was cited for that purpose, as this is the only suggestion in the majority opinion that we should ascertain the controlling…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Colton v. ColtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Bartlet v. KingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- Burnes v. BurnesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Clay v. . WoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Bruce v. BissellIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.