In Re Estate of Henning

California Supreme Court

In Re Estate of Henning

199 P. 39, 186 Cal. 307, 1921 Cal. LEXIS 444

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJune 20, 1921

DocketL. A. No. 6801.

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 199 P. 39 (In Re Estate of Henning) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Estate of Henning, 199 P. 39, 186 Cal. 307, 1921 Cal. LEXIS 444 (Cal. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

WILBUR, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying probate to a letter written by the deceased dated May 15, 1920, to his brother, the petitioner for its probate. Like most letters, it is entirely written, signed, and dated in the handwriting of the deceased. The letter is too long to quote. The writer states that he is coming east for the purpose of getting married. He expected to leave Los Angeles on July 3d, to arrive at Thurmont, Maryland, July 8th, and be married July 15th, if the girl he had picked out would have him. The writer discusses his own love affair and that of Hazel, who was willing to get married, but whose “Little Slim man” is very slow about asking her. The only possible justification for the claim that this letter is testamentary in character is the following: “If there is anny troble on the roade That is get hurt ore sick thay [Edison Company] look after me and if I should get killed there is plenty of money to put me away in fine shape. Then i want you to have everything.” [1] From the whole letter, however, it is evident that the deceased was contemplating matrimony rather than death. The judgment of the trial court was correct.

Order affirmed.

Olney, J., Shaw, J., Angellotti, C. J., Sloane, J., Lennon, J., and Lawlor, J., concurred.

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

WILBUR, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying probate to a letter written by the deceased dated May 15, 1920, to his brother, the petitioner for its probate. Like most letters, it is entirely written, signed, and dated in the handwriting of the deceased. The letter is too long to quote. The writer states that he is coming east for the purpose of getting married. He expected to leave Los Angeles on July 3d, to arrive at Thurmont, Maryland, July 8th, and be married July 15th, if the girl he had picked out would have him. The writer discusses his own love affair and that of Hazel, who was willing to get married, but whose “Little Slim man” is very slow about asking her. The only possible justification for the claim that this letter is testamentary in character is the following: “If there is anny troble on the roade That is get hurt ore sick thay [Edison Company] look after me and if I should get killed there is plenty of money to put me away in fine shape. Then i want you to have everything.” [1] From the whole letter, however, it is evident that the deceased was contemplating matrimony rather than death. The judgment of the trial court was correct.

Order affirmed.

Olney, J., Shaw, J., Angellotti, C. J., Sloane, J., Lennon, J., and Lawlor, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 P. 39, 186 Cal. 307, 1921 Cal. LEXIS 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-henning-cal-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack