Legal Opinion
Canaan National Bank v. Peters
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 5, 1991No. 13930PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGlass, J.
The sole issue in this will construction case is whether the testatrix, Elsie Junod, intended a provision in her will concerning the offer of certain property for sale to be a mere precatory suggestion or, rather, a mandatory directive. The trial court, having found the will to be ambiguous, determined that the testatrix intended the provision to be mandatory. Although we conclude that the intent of the testatrix was unambiguously expressed in her will, we too conclude that she intended the provision to be mandatory and now affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts are…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Wyman v. RoesnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
- Hazel S. Wisely, of the Estate of William H. Wisely, Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990
- Sturdevant v. SAE Warehouse, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
- Connecticut Junior Republic v. Sharon HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Goetz v. Old National Bank of MartinsburgWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1954
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Morton Buildings, Inc. v. BannonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Andrews v. GorbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- SLI International Corp. v. CrystalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Corcoran v. Department of Social ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Scott v. State Bar Examining CommitteeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.