TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Estate of Billings

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF E. L. BILLINGS

In re Estate of Billings, 1 P. 701 (Cal. 1884)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 4, 1884
Judges
Myrick
Citations
1 P. 70164 Cal. 4271884 Cal. LEXIS 379
Headnotes
Olographic Will — Validity. —A paper offered for probate as an olographic will, held, to be invalid because a portion of the date was printed.
Summary
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of the county of Sacramento. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Myrick

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Myrick, J.

The body of the script proposed as an olographic will was entirely written and was signed by the hand of the deceased. The date reads thus “ Sacramento, April 1st, 1880.” The words “ April 1st” were written by the deceased, the balance was printed, the deceased having, evidently, taken a sheet of paper with a letter-head, stating the business and location of his firm, the name of the place “Sacramento,” and the year “1880,” printed, and filled in the month and day, “April 1st.”

We had occasion to consider the principle underlying the facts of this case, in Estate of Martin, 58 Cal. 530 , and Estate of Rand, 61 Cal. 468 . Section 1277, Civil Code, requires that a paper, to constitute an olographic will, must been tirely Avritten, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator. It must be entirely Avritten, it must be entirely dated, and it must be entirely signed by him. If it be partly written by him and partly Avritten by another, or printed; if it be partly dated or signed by him and partly by another, it is not a compliance Avith the statute. The Avords “April 1st” do not constitute a date—do not show on what April 1st the paper was written—there being, as was suggested on the argument, many days “ April 1st,” in the life of any man; it was requisite that the whole date, April 1, 1880, should have been written by him in order to comply with the statute.

Order affirmed.

*428 Sharpstein, J., and Thornton, J., concurred.

Hearing in Bank denied.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 35 cases

View all citing references →
1885–1886: 11899–1900: 11901–1902: 21907–1908: 11909–1910: 11913–1914: 21915–1916: 21917–1918: 11919–1920: 21923–1924: 11925–1926: 11927–1928: 11929–1930: 31935–1936: 11939–1940: 21941–1942: 11943–1944: 21951–1952: 11955–1956: 11957–1958: 21959–1960: 11967–1968: 21981–1982: 22003–2004: 118852026peak 1929 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Estate of Fay1 Coffey 428 (Cal. Supp. Ct. (San Francisco) 1902)
  2. Estate of Hazelwood249 Cal. App. 2d 263 (1967)
  3. Jacobson v. Kristovich249 Cal. App. 2d 263 (1967)
  4. In re Estate of Vance162 P. 103 (Cal. 1916)
  5. In re Estate of Plumel90 P. 192 (Cal. 1907)
  6. In re the Estate of Manchester163 P. 358 (Cal. 1917)

Most recent

  1. In re Will of Ferree848 A.2d 81 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003)
  2. Estate of Black641 P.2d 754 (Cal. 1982)
  3. Bouch v. Rombotis641 P.2d 754 (Cal. 1982) · Dissent
  4. Estate of Hazelwood249 Cal. App. 2d 263 (1967)
  5. Jacobson v. Kristovich249 Cal. App. 2d 263 (1967)
  6. Lundblade v. Avery344 P.2d 612 (Cal. Ct. App. 1959)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
In re Estate of Rand, 61 Cal. 468 (1882) 19
Estate of Martin, 58 Cal. 530 (1881) 16

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list