38 Mich. 412 (Mich. 1878), Pierce v. Pierce
|Citation:||38 Mich. 412|
|Opinion Judge:||Campbell, C. J.|
|Party Name:||Emeline E. Pierce et al. v. Loren Pierce et al|
|Attorney:||Arthur Brown and H. F. Severens for plaintiffs in error. May, Buck & Powers and Edwards & Sherwood for defendants in error.|
|Case Date:||April 02, 1878|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Michigan|
Submitted January 16, 1878
Error to Kalamazoo.
On appeal from the probate of the will of Isaac Pierce, the will was held invalid. Proponents bring error.
Judgment reversed with costs and a new trial granted.
The will of Isaac Pierce was admitted to probate December 2d, 1873. It was executed July 29, 1871, and he died July 12, 1873. On appeal by certain of his heirs at law, the will was held invalid. Error is brought against that judgment. The will gave a large portion of the property to his second wife and to her children, who were under age. His children by a former wife, from whom he was divorced, were much older. Two of his sons he made no provision for, saying they had been provided for before. To three others of his older children he devised land, and to a married daughter he made a money bequest. He married his second wife, the plaintiff in error Emeline E. Pierce, in 1855, sixteen years before the date of the will, and eighteen years before his death.
The alleged objections to the will were incapacity generally, and from intoxication and undue influence. There was no evidence of general incapacity, the proof being uncontradicted that he was in his right mind. The only questions worthy of consideration arise out of the admission or exclusion of testimony, and rulings upon the other points, and certain complaints of the action of the court.
Before going into the general merits it may be proper to refer to two classes of objections to the rulings and course on the trial. It is claimed that certain rulings of the court...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP