In Re Estate of Purcell
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying a petition for the revocation of a will, and from an order denying a motion to strike out a cost-bill. Frank J. Finlayson, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Ball & Ball, Thomas Ball, Murphy & Poplin, and Park Henshaw, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
Mary B. Purcell died testate on May 15, 1910. Her last will was executed on June 18, 1909, and was admitted to probate on June 1, 1910, on the petition of Charles A. Purcell and two other persons, all of whom were named therein as executors. Within a year thereafter the present proceeding was begun by certain of her heirs to revoke the probate of her will. The grounds alleged were: 1. That it was procured by the fraud and undue influence of Charles A.. Purcell and others in collusion with him; 2. That at the time of its execution the testatrix did not have testamentary capacity, and 3. That…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Estate of DolbeerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Estate of ChevallierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- People v. GallagherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- De La Cuesta v. CalkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. BuckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Peterson v. LoganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Estate of PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Jenkins v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Conley v. MervisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Finkler v. PurcellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.