Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Estate of Niehenke

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1991No. 57348-4Published

1DissentDore, C.J.

(dissenting) — The question in the subject case is who is entitled to exercise the option to purchase the "Home Place". The majority holds that: purchase options are not always "personal" to the optionee; Washington's anti-lapse statute may apply to testamentary options; and that, applying the anti-lapse statute to the option in this case, the surviving children of Francis Niehenke, the testator's grandnieces and grandnephews, are entitled to exercise Francis Niehenke's purchase option. I agree that purchase options are not always "personal" to the optionee and that, in some cases, the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In Re the Estate of BergauWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  2. In Re Estate of RiemckeWashington Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Burg v. Old National BankWashington Supreme Court · 1971
  4. In Re Estate of MellWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Tuecke v. TueckeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1964

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