Belcher

Belcher v. Moises

Good Law
193 Cal. App. 3d 238·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1887·239 Cal. Rptr. 137
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 1987No. B021850California2,255 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lui, J.

Appellant Berenice Moisés filed a will contest challenging the validity of an addition to a holographic codicil to the will of her uncle, Earl Archer. Archer’s cousin, Donald Belcher, and Belcher’s nominee to administer Archer’s estate, Dickinson Thatcher (respondents), filed a general demurrer to the contest. After a hearing, the demurrer was sustained without leave to amend, the contest was dismissed, and the challenged codicil was admitted to probate. Moisés appeals.

We conclude that, as a matter of law, the addition to the codicil adopts the signature of the original codicil. Therefore, the trial court properly sustained the demurrer without leave to amend as to the allegation that the additional codicil was invalid because it was unsigned.

Further, the allegation that Archer lacked testamentary intent when he wrote the addition is a conclusion which does not withstand a demurrer. However, this defect could possibly be cured by pleading the appropriate ultimate facts. Therefore, the court erred by sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend as to this allegation.

Factual and Procedural Background

Earl Archer died in Los Angeles in 1986, leaving a formally…

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.