Legal Opinion

Estate of Fritschi

California Supreme Court

Decided August 27, 1963No. Sac. 7293PublishedCited by 51 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.

This ease turns solely upon the issue of whether substantial evidence supports the findings of the jury that the involved will was invalid because the testator lacked testamentary capacity to execute it and because one Marie Teed exerted undue influence upon him. For the reasons that follow we have concluded that, without doubt, the record does not sustain a finding of lack of testamentary capacity. Although the question of the adequacy of the showing as to undue influence is more difficult, our examination of the record compels the conclusion that the record does not sustain the findings.

Dr.…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. In re Estate of McDevittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Peterson v. LoganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Estate of PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Estate of LingenfelterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. Rice v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  2. In Re Estate of McCauleyArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Maltaman v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Estate of GeloneseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  5. Estate of NelsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964

46 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