Stone v. Holden
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFellows, C. J.
(after stating the facts). We shall consider the single question of whether the court should have directed a verdict sustaining the will. The question is concededly an open, one in this jurisdiction. The case has been well briefed. An independent examination of the authorities in this country and in England discloses but few cases outside those cited by counsel which would assist the court in reaching a conclusion. Óur statute relative to the execution of wills (3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 11821) follows the early English statute -of Charles II (29 Car. II, chap. 8, § 5). Four years after the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Adams v. FieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
- In Re the Estate of ManchesterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- In Re the Probate of the Will of FieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Waller v. WallerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1845
- Armstrong's Ex'r v. Armstrong's HeirsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Kinney v. GardellaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- In Re Bem EstateMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
- In Re Thomas' EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
- In Re McNair's EstateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1949
- Estate of Lagershausen v. KustaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.