Legal Opinion

In the Estate of Craigen

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)

Decided January 21, 2010No. 09-09-00285-CVPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HOLLIS HORTON, Justice.

We are asked to determine whether the trial court properly interpreted the dispo-sitory language in a holographic will. If the will is ambiguous, the applicable rules of will construction yield one result. If the will is unambiguous, the trial court was required to give effect to the express language of the will, and arguably should have reached a different result.

The trial court, in construing the testator’s intentions under the will, found “[t]hat it was the intent of the [tjestator to leave his entire estate to his surviving wife in full.” The trial court…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. San Antonio Area Foundation v. LangTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  2. McMurry v. StanleyTexas Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Stewart v. SelderTexas Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Guilliams v. KoonsmanTexas Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Heller v. HellerTexas Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Annette Knopf and Stanley Gray v. William R. Gray, Karen A. Gray and Polasek Farms, LLC, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2017
  2. Felix Kyles Ford v. Martha Conley, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2018
  3. in Re: Estate of Patricia Ann Hernandez, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2018

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

Powered by the Exa API