Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Estates and Trusts

1934

Probate

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Wills-Right Of Beneficiaries To Compromise So As To Defeat Provisions Of Will-Waiver Of Benefit Jun 1934

Wills-Right Of Beneficiaries To Compromise So As To Defeat Provisions Of Will-Waiver Of Benefit

Michigan Law Review

Testator died leaving a valid will. The beneficiaries, who were also the heirs at law, presented a stipulation to the court, signed by all the parties in interest, agreeing that the will should not be admitted to probate; and the court refused the will. Later a dispute arose as to the settlement, and some of the beneficiaries brought a bill in equity to set aside the court order. Held, the agreement was supported by a valid consideration and is binding on the parties. Order of the court refusing probate upheld. In re Murphy's Estate, (Iowa 1934) 252 N. …


Wills-Contract Not To Contest Jun 1934

Wills-Contract Not To Contest

Michigan Law Review

A testatrix left the bulk of her estate to the plaintiff whom she named as her executor. Defendant, dissatisfied with his bequest, threatened to contest the will. Thereupon, the parties entered into a contract whereby the plaintiff agreed to give the defendant a piece of land and a sum of money in addition to his legacy in consideration of defendant's promise not to contest the will. Shortly thereafter defendant joined relatives of the decedent in opposing probate. In an action in equity to specifically enforce the agreement, held, that the contract was valid and that the defendant be permanently …


Certain Evasive And Protective Devices Affecting Succession To Decedents' Estates, Alvin Evans Feb 1934

Certain Evasive And Protective Devices Affecting Succession To Decedents' Estates, Alvin Evans

Michigan Law Review

In Anglo-American law for many generations the power of an owner of property to determine the disposal of his estate at death has met with but comparatively few limitations. The statute creating this power was motivated by the assumption that the interest of the owner, reaching even beyond death, is paramount to other social interests. This power is an important item in a capitalistic system. And even if he does not exercise his power, the decedent may rest assured that another statute will do for him approximately what he may be supposed to have desired.