Longshore v. Desmond

Good Law
1963 Cal. App. LEXIS 1518·223 Cal. App. 2d 211·35 Cal. Rptr. 737·1 A.L.R. 3d 1043
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 11, 1963Civ. 21277California1,416 words

Opinion

Opinion

Taylor, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment denying the appellant’s petition to revoke probate of her mother’s will. The only question is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings and conclusions of the court below.

Helene L. Desmond died on May 28, 1959, leaving a holographic will dated August 31, 1951, which was admitted to probate on September 17, 1959. The chief beneficiary is the respondent, William L. Desmond, one of the sons of the decedent and the executor named in the instrument. The other beneficiaries are the remaining adult children of the deceased and three of her ten minor grandchildren. Joseph F. Desmond, the other son, filed his petition for revocation of probate and was joined therein by his sister, Ruth M. Longshore, the sole appellant herein, The contestants alleged that the document admitted to probate was not a valid testamentary instrument in that it was a conditional will, the condition of which was never fulfilled, making the instrument inoperative and invalid.

The matter was heard by the court sitting without a jury. After hearing all of the evidence, the court made, among others, a finding of fact that the deceased did not intend to use certain…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.