Legal Opinion · Dissent

Loudenslager Will

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 16, 1968No. Appeal, No. 73Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Me. Justice Robeets:

Although the majority correctly states that the only question before us is the county of decedent’s domicile, it fails to note that the parties have arrived at an understanding1 that the other two grounds advanced to defeat probate—lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence—will be litigated after this Court’s decision.2 With these further grounds of attack reserved, the appeal here is from a clearly interlocutory order. See, e.g., Stewart Estate, 423 Pa. 189, 223 A. 2d 685 *43(1966); Keasbey’s Trust Estate, 342 Pa. 439, 20 A. 2d 281 (1941). Of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Steel v. LevySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  2. Heinz's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  3. West, Admrx. v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Geho's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  5. Keasbey's Trust EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941

3 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