Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Matter of Estate of Hunt

Utah Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1992No. 890469Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

DURHAM, Justice:

(Concurring and Dissenting)

I concur with Justice Howe on the motion to dismiss. I dissent on the merits.

This case depends on the legal effect of a will in which the testator specifically names his four stepchildren and purports to disinherit all those not named in the document, but fails to affirmatively and specifically dispose of any assets. In interpreting this document, we should be guided by two recurring themes in probate law: the need to follow the testator’s intent and the goal of avoiding intestacy. See, e.g., Utah Code Ann. § 75-2-603 (“The intention of the testator…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Matter of Estate of GardnerUtah Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Auerbach v. SamuelsUtah Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Chambers v. Warren, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1983
  4. Seattle-First National Bank v. TingleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API