Legal Opinion

Hayden v. Nuzum

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 1920PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: W. J. Turner, Circuit Judge. This is.an appeabby Mortimer M. Hayden, contestant of the proposed will of Antoinette A. Keenan, from a judgment affirming a judgment of the county court of Milwaukee county admitting to probate the alleged will, with two codicils, of the above-named testatrix.

Read the full summary

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: W. J. Turner, Circuit Judge. This is.an appeabby Mortimer M. Hayden, contestant of the proposed will of Antoinette A. Keenan, from a judgment affirming a judgment of the county court of Milwaukee county admitting to probate the alleged will, with two codicils, of the above-named testatrix. On July 25, 1915, a petition for the probate of this will and codicils was presented to the county court by R. Franklin Nusum, who is named as executor by the first codicil. Mortimer M. Flayden filed objection to the probate of the alleged…

1Opinion of the CourtSiebeckeR, J.

It is contended that the court erred in finding that no undue influence was exercised upon the testatrix to procure her to make and execute this will and codicils. The record fails to show that any improper attempts were made to persuade or induce Mrs. Keenan to make these testamentary dispositions of her estate or °that any undue influence was exercised that misled or improperly influenced her to do so. Upon this issue in the case the trial court’s conclusions are clearly right and cannot be disturbed.

The important controversy of fact litigated in the case is: Was Mrs. Keenan of sound and…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Harrington v. PierWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Dodge v. WilliamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
  3. Will of Ball v. BostonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Ruth v. OberbrunnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Heiss v. MurpheyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Federation Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1979
  2. Federation Pharmacy Services, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API