Estate of Sullivan

Sullivan v. Sullivan

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 593·94 Cal. App. 674·271 P. 753
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1928Docket No. 6554.California1,596 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koford, J.

This is an appeal from an order admitting to probate as the last will and testament of said deceased three documents written in his handwriting. The three documents in question follow:

It is contended by appellants that the first document is not a will because it is not signed within the meaning of the code requirements of a holographic will. It is not essential that such a will be signed at the end thereof. “The true rule, as we conceive it to be, is that, wherever placed, the fact that it was intended as an executing signature must satisfactorily appear on the face of the document itself. If it is at the end of the document, the universal custom of mankind forces the conclusion that it was appended as an execution, if nothing to the contrary appears. If placed elsewhere, it is for the court to say, from ‘ an inspection of the whole document, its language as well as its form, and the relative position of its parts, whether or not there is a positive and satisfactory inference from the document itself that the signature was so placed with the intent that it should there serve as a token of execution.” {Estate of Manchester, 174 Cal. 417, 421 [Ann. Cas. 1918B, 227, L. R. A. 1917D,…

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.