Power v. Overholt
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 9, Jau. T., 1917, by . defendant, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., April T., 1916, No. 65, on verdict for plaintiff in an issue devisavit vel non in case of Emma McClellan Power v. Susan McClellan Overholt. Feigned issue to determine the validity of a testamentary paper, as the will of a decedent.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 9, Jau. T., 1917, by . defendant, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., April T., 1916, No. 65, on verdict for plaintiff in an issue devisavit vel non in case of Emma McClellan Power v. Susan McClellan Overholt. Feigned issue to determine the validity of a testamentary paper, as the will of a decedent. The facts appear in the following opinion by Hause, J., sur defendant’s motions for a new trial and for judgment n. o. v.: The verdict of the jury in favor of the plaintiff determined that a certain paper writing, dated May 31, 1913, was not the valid will of Miss Thomasine E. Boyer.…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cueiam,
The judgment in this case is affirmed on the opinion of the learned court below dischárging the rules for judgment non obstante veredicto and for a new trial.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Sommerville WillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Breeden v. StoneSupreme Court of Colorado · 2000
- Firestene v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Leedom EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Duncan's Contested WillSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.