Legal Opinion

Richland Trust Co. v. Becvar

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1975No. 74-982PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Neill, C. J.

In the instant cause this court is called upon to review the construction placed upon the sentence “ [o]ne-seventh (l/7th) to Louise Hummel, per stirpes” in the residuary clause of the will of M. Elizabeth Hummel by the Court of Appeals.

*221Tbe function of the court in a will construction case is to determine and apply the testatrix’s intention, as expressed in the language of the whole will, read in the light of the circumstances surrounding its execution. Casey v. Gallagher (1967), 11 Ohio St. 2d 42, 46, 227 N. E. 2d 801.

The Court of Appeals found, and this court agrees, that M. Elizabeth…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Casey v. GallagherOhio Supreme Court · 1967

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Central Trust Co. v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Matter of Estate of WaltersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. Belardo v. BelardoOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
  4. In Re the Estate of WinslowCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1997
  5. American Diabetes Ass'n v. Diabetes SocietyOhio Court of Appeals · 1986

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