Bigelow v. Gillott
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Appeal from a decree of the Probate Court for the county of Suffolk," allowing a certain instrument, with the exception of the “sixth” and “thirteenth” clauses thereof, as the last will and testament of Thomas Liversidge, deceased. The will of the testator contained the following clauses : “ Sixth.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a decree of the Probate Court for the county of Suffolk," allowing a certain instrument, with the exception of the “sixth” and “thirteenth” clauses thereof, as the last will and testament of Thomas Liversidge, deceased. The will of the testator contained the following clauses : “ Sixth. I give to my executors the sum of six thousand pounds sterling, in trust, to be used and appropriated by them for the purpose of paying the debts which my father, Stephen Liversidge, owed in the year eighteen hundred and twenty-nine, said payment to be made to the legal representatives of the…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
The presiding justice who heard this case has found as facts, that the testator erased the sixth and thirteenth clauses of his will after its execution, and that such erasures were made with the intention of revoking the said clauses, but with no intention of revoking or defeating the other provisions of the will. These findings were clearly justified by the evidence. We need not consider the evidence in detail, as the appellants do not contend that the findings were erroneous, the only questions raised by them being as to the legal effect of such erasures.
The statute provides that “ no will…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Sanderson v. NorcrossMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Watson v. HinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Worcester Bank & Trust Co. v. EllisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Southworth v. SouthworthSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- Russell v. TylerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.