Legal Opinion

Bloodworth v. McCook

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 16, 1941No. 13888PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Duckworth, Justice.

It appears that the testator signed the will by making his mark. To the left of his signature, under the word “witness,” appears the name “W. H. Hardie.” Under the name of the testator and W. H. Hardie is an attestation clause to which the names of three witnesses are subscribed. Upon the trial the three witnesses who subscribed their names below the attestation clause testified with reference to the execution of the will, but the propounder did not produce W. H. Hardie as a witness, and no effort was made to explain the failure to do so. Several grounds of the motion for a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. White & Co. v. MagarahanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
  2. Deupree v. DeupreeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1872
  3. Smith v. DobbinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
  4. Slade v. SladeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1923
  5. Crutchfield v. McCallieSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Orr v. BlalockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
  2. Thornton v. HulmeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
  3. Jones v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1957
  4. Sears Mortgage Corp. v. Leeds Building Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1996
  5. Trauner v. First Tennessee Bank National Ass'n (In re Simpson)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · 2016

3 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