Roe v. Duty
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for ■ Columbia county, Mills, J., entered May 19, 1920, dismissing a petition to contest a will.
1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.
This is a will contest. The charge against the will is that of undue influence. The trial court took the advice of the jury upon the facts, and the verdict was returned finding undue influence. In response to a motion subsequently made, the trial court declined to accept the verdict of the jury and entered a judgment dismissing the petition. From this judgment, the appeal is prosecuted.
The will in question is that of Sarah Jane Duty, deceased. The contestant, Mrs. Mary A. Roe, is a daughter, and the chief beneficiary under the will is Smith Duty, a son. About the year 1897, Daniel B. Duty and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In re Estate of TresidderWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Patterson v. McWhirkWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Murphy v. MurphyWashington Supreme Court · 1917
- Weber v. GeisslerWashington Supreme Court · 1918
- Parr v. CampbellWashington Supreme Court · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Dean v. JordanWashington Supreme Court · 1938
- In Re Bottger's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1942
- Estill v. Sisters of CharityWashington Supreme Court · 1970
- In Re the Estate of MartinsonWashington Supreme Court · 1948
- In Re Larsen's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1937
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.