Legal Opinion

Whittemore v. Russell

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided March 14, 1888PublishedCited by 16 opinions

On report. Bill in equity by the widow of John Whittemore late of Temple, deceased, against the administrators, with the will annexed, and the heirs at law, to obtain a construction of the will. By virtue of the authority laid down in the 6th Mete. 400, it is not necessary that it should appear by the will itself that an omission, (we claim there is no omission in this case however) was intentional, but it may be shown by parol evidence.

Read the full summary

On report. Bill in equity by the widow of John Whittemore late of Temple, deceased, against the administrators, with the will annexed, and the heirs at law, to obtain a construction of the will. By virtue of the authority laid down in the 6th Mete. 400, it is not necessary that it should appear by the will itself that an omission, (we claim there is no omission in this case however) was intentional, but it may be shown by parol evidence. I would cite further the 123 Mass. 8 ; also cite the decision in 106 Mass. 320, as to the intention of testator to name all his children, and as competent to…

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.

In this amicable proceeding to obtain a judicial construction of the will of John Whittemore, the first question encountered is one of fact, which is whether those of the testator’s children who do not receive anything under the will were intentionally omitted or not. The depositions in the case establish beyond doubt that the omission was intentional, and founded on good reasons.

The question of law which attaches to this branch of the case is, whether such intention may be shown by evidence aliunde the will, in connection with the internal evidence exhibited by the will itself. We cannot…

2Cited by16 opinions

  1. Bower v. BowerWashington Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Scott v. ScottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
  3. Whitby v. MotzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  4. Boman v. BomanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1892
  5. Pratt v. SkiffIllinois Supreme Court · 1919

11 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