Estate of Bristol v. Young
California Supreme Court
1DissentTraynor, J.
I dissent. There is no evidence in the present case to support the finding that the codicil was in existence at the time of the testator’s death. No one saw the codicil after its execution and delivery to the testator on April 28, 1941. It did not appear amongst the papers that the testator kept in his safe-deposit box in which was found after his death, the will of April 1, 1938, a codicil of July 28, 1939, a so-called “Second Codicil” not legally executed, and deeds to his children. There is no explanation for its disappearance between the time of its execution and the death of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Estate of PattersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Boice-Perrine Co. v. KelleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Gorman v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Griffiths v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Hyslop v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.