Martin Estate
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Bell,
Mary Martin died testate, leaving a surviving husband but no issue. The Record does not contain a copy of her home drawn will but the will did not contain a residuary clause. The husband elected to take against the will and thereafter claimed that he was entitled, under the Intestate Laws, to $10,000 and one-half (%) of the balance of the estate of which his wife died intestate. In pursuance of his said right, the husband petitioned to have his allowance of $10,000 set aside to him out of certain real estate of which the decedent died intestate.
These facts raise a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Orlosky v. HaskellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Tarlo's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- National Transit Co. v. BoardmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Phipps v. KirkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Appeal of LeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
3Cited by63 opinions
- Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board v. State College Area School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Martin v. SoblotneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Tp. of Moon v. POL. OFFICE. OF TP. OF MOONSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- STANDER v. KelleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- McCormick v. Columbus Conveyer Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.