IN RE NEIL'S ESTATE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A purported will is not valid if the testatrix did not sign or acknowledge her signature in the presence of at least two attesting witnesses.
The decedent's purported will was offered for probate. The testatrix did not sign the will or acknowledge her signature in the presence of two witness…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Will Execution Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of Frances Neil, deceased. From a judgment refusing to admit decedent's purported will to probate, an appeal is taken.
Judgment affirmed. The question before us for determination may be stated as follows: Is a purported will valid when the testatrix did not sign or cause her name to be signed or acknowledge her signature thereto in the presence of at least two attesting witnesses present at the same time as required by Section 731.07(2), Florida Statutes Annotated?
The Judge of the County Judge's Court answered the query in the negative. The Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit affirmed the judgment of the Judge of Probate.
Upon a careful consideration of the entire record filed in this court we are convinced that our action should be an affirmance of the judgment of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit.
Our decision in Johnson v. Johnson, 158 Fla. 315, 28 So. 2d 438, is controlling in the instant case. In that case the proponents of the will failed only to establish attestation. Here there is a failure to prove either execution or attestation.
Affirmed.
ADAMS, C.J., and CHAPMAN and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Anderson v. Anderson, 44 So.2d 652 (Fla. 1950)…804. And where the husband deserts his wife, leaving her in this state with dependent children she may constitute a head of a family. Jetton Lbr. Co. v. Hall, 67 Fla. 61, 64 So. 440, 51 L.R.A.,N.S., 1121. In the late case of Olsen v. Simpson, Fla., 39 So. 2d 801, this court, in a majority opinion expressed doubt that the husband was the head of a family, but would not disturb the holding of the Circuit Court on this point. In the Anderson case before us the facts stated in the stipulated record show a weake…
-
Lucile A. Anderson v. Garber, 183 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…s. Ander-son was not the head of the family and we have found nothing to disturb that finding. Accordingly, the order appealed from is •affirmed. Affirmed. . Soloman v. Davis, Fla.1958, 100 So. 2d 177, 67 A.L.R.2d 774; Olsen v. Simpson, Fla.1949, 39 So. 2d 801; Jones v. Federal Farm Mortgage Corporation, 138 Fla. 65, 188 So. 804 (1939); Barnett v. Pan American Surety Company, Fla.App.1962, 139 So. 2d 192; In Re Kionka’s Estate, Fla.App.1959, 113 So. 2d 603.…
-
Allen v. Margarete Dalk, 826 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2002)…re Bancker’s Estate, 232 So. 2d 431, 433 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), cert. denied, 238 So. 2d 111 (Fla.1970). This Court has held that where a testator fails to sign his or her will, that document will not be admitted to probate. See In re Neil’s Estate, 39 So. 2d 801 (Fla.1949). The signatures of both the testator and witnesses are needed to have a properly executed will. See In re Estate of Williams, 182 So. 2d 10, 13 (Fla.1965). In In re Estate of Olson, 181 So. 2d 642, 643 (Fla.1966), we held that an unattest…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence