Oetjen v. Oetjen
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re the Application for the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of Parsons (New York Surrogate's Court 1922)
- Castens v. Murray (Ga. 1905)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
In the case of Howard v. Hunter, 115 Ga. 357, this court held that in order for a written entry upon a will to operate .as a revocation thereof, it must have either been attested in the same manner and with the same formality as is required for the execution of a will, or the entry must have been written upon the will in such a manner as to obliterate or cancel some material portion of the will. The facts of the present case are almost identical with those of the case just referred to; the only difference being that one word of the entry in the present case was written across one word in the last line of the will. This word was in a sentence which stated merely that a word in the will had been changed before signing. It thus appears that no material portion of the will was obliterated, even if the mere writing across a word in a will, leaving the same perfectly legible, could be said to be an oblitera
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.