Legal Opinion

Slate v. Titmus

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided November 10, 1989No. Record 881365PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stephenson

The question presented in this appeal is whether a holographic writing was signed by the testator as required for a valid will by Code § 64.1-49.

In October 1987, Garland B. Slate told his nephew-in-law, Edward B. Titmus, where Titmus could find Slate’s will if anything happened to Slate. Slate died on December 25, 1987. Several days later, Titmus found a sealed envelope at the place Slate had described. On the front of the envelope, in Slate’s handwriting, was the following:

Will of Garland B. Slate

Atten: Edward B. Titmus

Within the envelope was a document, entirely in Slate’s handwriting, that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Warwick v. WarwickSupreme Court of Virginia · 1890
  2. Dinning v. DinningSupreme Court of Virginia · 1904
  3. Hamlet v. HamletSupreme Court of Virginia · 1945
  4. Hall v. BrigstockeSupreme Court of Virginia · 1950
  5. Hall v. BrigstockeSupreme Court of Virginia · 1950

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Berry v. TribleSupreme Court of Virginia · 2006
  2. Irving v. DivitoSupreme Court of Virginia · 2017
  3. Kidd v. GunterSupreme Court of Virginia · 2001
  4. Mills v. Cabell County Board of EducationDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2023
  5. Slate v. TitmusSupreme Court of Virginia · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API