Legal Opinion

In Re The Estate Of: Donald C. Muller

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 18, 2016No. 47013-6-IIUnpublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBjorgen, C.J.

¶1 Richard and Karen Petersen appeal the trial court’s order adjudicating the testacy of decedent Donald Muller, which invalidated on grounds of undue influence a will benefiting them. They argue that the trial court erred by (1) adjudicating the validity of a contested self-proving will, (2) excluding evidence under Washington’s dead man’s statute, (3) issuing inadequately supported findings of fact, and (4) declining to review and address their objections to the order. We hold that (1) the trial court properly adjudicated the validity of the will, (2) the Peter-sens have shown no reviewable…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Wright v. DAVE JOHNSON INS. INC.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2012
  2. River House Development, Inc. v. Integrus ArchitectureCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
  3. Palmer v. GoldenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  4. In Re Estate of PalmerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  5. Endicott v. SaulCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In the Matter of the Estate of: Maria G. PrimianiCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  2. Jennifer Lesinski, V. Joseph MienkoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2022
  3. Muller v. PetersenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API