Bridge's Estate

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Bridge's Estate

13 A.2d 125, 139 Pa. Super. 606, 1940 Pa. Super. LEXIS 90

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 12, 1940

DocketAppeal, 62

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 A.2d 125 (Bridge's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bridge's Estate, 13 A.2d 125, 139 Pa. Super. 606, 1940 Pa. Super. LEXIS 90 (Pa. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

We can see no essential difference between this case and Churchill’s Estate, 260 Pa. 94, 100-101, 103 A. 533. The proviso to section 2 of the Wills Act of June 7, 1917, P. L. 403, “That the presence of dispositive or testamentary words or directions, or the appointment of an executor, or the like, after the signature to a will, whether written before or after the execution thereof, shall not invalidate that which precedes the signature,” does not affect this case, for just as in Churchill’s Estate, supra, the point involved is whether the will was signed at the end thereof.

In precisely similar circumstances, except that in the Churchill case, the printed form of will was filled out *607 by the testator himself, while here it was filled out by another, the Supreme Court held that the will had not been signed by the testator at the end thereof.

We feel constrained to follow that decision.

The decree is reversed at the costs of the appellee, and it is ordered that the letters testamentary be revoked and the probate vacated.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam,

We can see no essential difference between this case and Churchill’s Estate, 260 Pa. 94, 100-101, 103 A. 533. The proviso to section 2 of the Wills Act of June 7, 1917, P. L. 403, “That the presence of dispositive or testamentary words or directions, or the appointment of an executor, or the like, after the signature to a will, whether written before or after the execution thereof, shall not invalidate that which precedes the signature,” does not affect this case, for just as in Churchill’s Estate, supra, the point involved is whether the will was signed at the end thereof.

In precisely similar circumstances, except that in the Churchill case, the printed form of will was filled out *607 by the testator himself, while here it was filled out by another, the Supreme Court held that the will had not been signed by the testator at the end thereof.

We feel constrained to follow that decision.

The decree is reversed at the costs of the appellee, and it is ordered that the letters testamentary be revoked and the probate vacated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.2d 125, 139 Pa. Super. 606, 1940 Pa. Super. LEXIS 90, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bridges-estate-pasuperct-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack