In re Murfield
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Jones District Court.— Hon. James D. GrIEEEN, Judge. The will of J. S. Murfield, deceased, was duly ■ offered for probate by the executor of his estate and others. Hattie A. Miller, a daughter of decedent, contested the probate of the will, and filed objections thereto. These were overruled, and the will admitted to probate. Hattie A. Miller appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtRouinson, J.
The instrument in controversy consists of two parts. The first is in form a will, signed on the twenty-second day of April, 1886, by the testator, and attested by E. Y. Miller and John B. Murfield. The second is a codicil, written on the same sheet of paper as the first, signed by the testator on the thirtieth day of September, 1886, and duly attested. It is conceded that John B. Murfield, who was a subscribing witness to the first part, is named therein as a beneficiary, and that he was not offered as a witness to prove its execution. The entire instrument was admitted to probate ..on the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Newton v. Seaman's Friend SocietyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Jackson ex dem. Herrick v. BabcockNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Hopkins v. HoltWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Murphy v. BlackSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Greve v. CamerySupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re Lost Will of AyresOhio Court of Appeals · 1940