Case Citations [i] (July 2016 through April 2017)

handle is hein.ali/retpwodt0042 and id is 1 raw text is: 


                         DONATIVE TRANSFERS


                             CHAPTER 3. EXECUTION OF WILLS

                             PART  A. EXECUTION FORMALITIES

   3.1 Attested Wills

  Vt.2016. Com. (s) quot. in ftn. In a probate dispute between testator's six children and seven
  grandchildren, co-executors of testator's estate challenged the probate court's allowance of a
  handwritten document as decedent's will, claiming that the document was an ineffective conditional
  will, because its first sentence stated, In the event that I don't make it through surgery on Thurs the
  23rd of Jan. '03, and testator survived the surgery and lived for ten more years. The trial court
  determined that the will was properly allowed and that it was not conditional. While affirming that trial
  court's conclusion that the will was properly allowed, this court reversed and remanded on the issue of
  whether it could be considered conditional. The court noted that, under Restatement Third of Property:
  Wills and Other Donative Transfers  3.1, a conditional or contingent will was a will that took effect
  only upon the happening of a specified contingency. In re Estate of Holbrook, 140 A.3d 788, 790.

  Wyo.2016. Cit. in ftn. After testator's wife filed a petition to probate testator's will, testator's daughter
  from a previous marriage filed a petition to revoke the order admitting the will to probate, asserting that
  it had been improperly executed and was the product of undue influence and fraud. The trial court
  granted summary judgment for daughter, finding that the will was not self-proving, and that the will
  could not be proven, because the only witness who could recall the signing did not remember seeing the
  other witness sign the will. Reversing and remanding, this court held that the trial court erred when it
  concluded that in all cases where a will was not self-proving the proponent had to establish that the
  witnesses signed the will in the presence of each other and in the presence of the testator. The court
  noted that, although Restatement Third of Property: Wills and Other Donative Transfers  3.1 provided
  that a will proponent offering proof by affidavit was required to show that the witnesses signed in the
  presence of each other and in the presence of the testator, those requirements did not apply to the
  provision for proof by oral testimony. In re Estate of Meyer, 367 P.3d 629, 640.

   3.3 Excusing Harmless Errors

  Conn.App.2016.  Quot. but not fol., com. (b) quot. in ftn. Decedent's son sought to have admitted into
  probate a will that was signed by decedent and acknowledged by a notary public, but not attested by two
  witnesses, as required under the Connecticut Wills Act. The probate court found that the will was not
  duly proved and did not admit the will to probate; the trial court dismissed son's appeal. Affirming, this
  court held that, according to the Connecticut Supreme Court, a will proponent was required to

2A W        For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?