Legal Opinion · Dissent

Peterson v. Harrell

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided February 1, 2010No. S09A1857Published

1DissentCarley, Presiding Justice

I cannot agree with the affirmance of the trial court’s admission of Testatrix Marion Peterson’s alleged will to probate. Even assuming that the will was duly executed in 1976, the cancellation of a material portion of the will raises the presumption, which has not been rebutted, that Testatrix intended to revoke the entire will. Although the majority purports to assume the existence of a material cancellation, it actually conflates the separate issues of what constitutes an obliteration or cancellation, what is a material portion of the will, and how the intention to revoke is determined.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hall v. HopperSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
  2. Hardeman v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2000
  3. Hartz v. SobelSupreme Court of Georgia · 1911
  4. Cornelius v. CrosbySupreme Court of Georgia · 1979
  5. Morris v. BullockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API