Legal Opinion

Connor v. Purcell

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided September 7, 1962No. 3718PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COLLINGS, Justice.

Edith Purcell filed an application in the Probate Court to have admitted to probate an alleged Nuncupative Codicil to the will of Hubert C. Drawe. The application was ■opposed in the Probate Court by Dorothy Lee Drawe Connor, joined by her husband, and by W. H. Drawe, individually and as independent executor of the will of said deceased Hubert C. Drawe. The application to probate the codicil was denied by the County Court and Edith Purcell appealed to the 93rd Judicial Court of Hidalgo County. That court, after a trial, ordered that the codicil be admitted to probate. From…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Martin v. McAdamsTexas Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Lightfoot v. PoindexterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917
  3. Moos v. First State Bank of UvaldeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
  4. Sanders v. KirbieTexas Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Richardson v. BeanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Dabney v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980
  2. Wilkerson v. SlaughterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API