Legal Opinion
MacFarlane v. Farwell
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 21, 1936No. Civ. No. 10168PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRAY, J., pro tem.
The will of the deceased was admitted to probate. In this will the appellants, who are the heirs at law and next of kin of said deceased, were disinherited. They filed a petition to revoke the probate of the will upon the grounds: First, that the testatrix was not of sound mind at the time of the execution of said will, and secondly, that it was obtained by the undue influence of William Farwell and Miss Blanche Carpenter. The lower court sustained their contention and revoked the probate of the will, from which order the respondent herein, William Farwell, appealed.
This…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cox v. SchnerrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Hotaling v. HotalingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Bacon v. SouleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Knight v. TrippCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- In Re Estate of NuttCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Fish v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Estate of SchererCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Estate of TrefrenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Richelle L. v. Roman Catholic ArchbishopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- In Re the Estate of RandallIdaho Supreme Court · 1942
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.