Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kehr Will

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 23, 1953No. Appeal, No. 246Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Allen M. Stearne:

I am unable to join in the majority opinion. The single question involved is whether or not a notation on an unexecuted, altered, carbon copy of a probated will constitutes a revocation of the will under the provisions of the statute. The majority hold that it does. I am of the contrary view.

At the inception it is to be borne in mind that the privilege of disposing of an estate by will or through inheritance is not a natural or a constitutional right but exists solely by grace of the sovereign: Strode v. Commonwealth, 52 Pa. 181; Maginn’s…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. United States v. PerkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Burtt WillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  3. Lockhart's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  4. In re the Probate of a Paper Propounded as the Last Will & Testament of AkersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
  5. Maginn's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API