Estate of Major

In Re Estate of Major

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 132·89 Cal. App. 238·264 P. 542
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 14, 1928Docket No. 6212.California1,110 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Tyler, J.

Appeal from an order admitting a will to probate. The sole question here presented is whether or not the instrument so admitted constitutes a holographic will. It reads as follows:

The evidence introduced in support of the petition established that Arthur Major was a resident of and died in the city and county of San Francisco, California, on the fifteenth day of February, 1926, leaving an estate of the approximate value of $12,000, and leaving surviving him as his next of kin and heirs at law a brother, Joseph Edward Major, and a sister, Catherine Robertson; that the above recited instrument submitted for probate was sent to Oscar Major through the mail by his uncle, Arthur Major, the decedent, in the month of December, 1924, and that such instrument was entirely written, dated and signed in the handwriting of the deceased. No evidence was introduced as to testamentary capacity of the deceased. The court found among other facts that deceased was, at the date of the execution of the instrument in question, of sound and disposing mind and that the letter was testamentary in character. As conclusions of law it was determined that it constituted a holographic will and it was…

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.