Estate of Chinmark

Good Law
1 Myrick 128
Superior Court of California, County of San FranciscoApril 11, 1877No. 7642California509 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

The will, as propounded, was executed by the deceased January 31, 1877. The will contained the following clause:

The day following, to wit, Feb. 1, 1877, the deceased, with the intent and for the purpose of cancelling the said *129 clause, with his own hand drew two ink lines over and upon each line of said clause, which ink lines covered each and every word in each and every line of writing in said clause; also one line in ink diagonally from the left hand upper corner to the right hand lower corner of the same clause; also three diagonal lines in ink from the upper line of the clause down to the left and to and including the last line of the clause; said cancellation still remains on the face of said instrument, but notwithstanding such cancellation the words of said clause are plainly legible.

From the foregoing facts the conclusion of law is that the deceased in his lifetime cancelled the said clause, and that the same is not a portion of his will; and that the instrument propounded, omitting the said cancelled clause, is the will of deceased, and that probate thereof should be granted.

October 2, 1877.

Application of J. C. Bates, Esq., for allowance of compensation to…

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.