Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sunderland v. Whitcomb

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 14, 2002No. 48897-0-IPublished

1DissentEllington, J.

(dissenting) — I must respectfully dissent. I believe the will is ambiguous, and that it was effective to revoke the living trust. I would therefore affirm.

The objective in a probate proceeding is to determine the intent of the testator. RCW 11.12.230; In re Estate of Bergau, 103 Wn.2d 431, 435, 693 P.2d 703 (1985). The objective in interpreting a trust is to determine the intent of the settlor. Old Nat’l Bank & Trust Co. of Spokane v. Hughes, 16 Wn.2d 584, 587, 134 P.2d 63 (1943); Seattle First Nat’l Bank v. Crosby, 42 Wn.2d 234, 246, 254 P.2d 732 (1953). The fact that Robert Furst’s will…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re the Estate of BergauWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Burg v. Old National BankWashington Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Seattle First National Bank v. CrosbyWashington Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Old National Bank & Union Trust Co. v. HughesWashington Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Poltz v. TyreeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API