Legal Opinion

Flanders v. White

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1932PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

This appeal presents for consideration the doctrine of dependent relative revocation which regards as mutually dependent the acts of one who destroys his will and thereupon proceeds to substitute in its place another instrument for the distribution of his bounty when the two acts are the result of one plan. It is often said that this doctrine employs the equitable principles which relieve from the ill effects of mistake, and holds that if the second instrument, due to faulty execution or other cause, is incapable of giving effect to the deceased’s intent, his destruction of the first was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Luis v. MuhrbackOregon Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Sanderson v. NorcrossMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
  3. Denning v. McCoyOregon Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Bethell v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1837
  5. In re the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of AllenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1917

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Second Church of Christ, Scientist, of New York City v. KaufmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Stewart v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Florida · 1940
  3. Crosby v. Alton Ochsner Medical FoundationMississippi Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Worcester Bank & Trust Co. v. EllisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  5. Van Vlack v. Van VlackOregon Supreme Court · 1947

12 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