Erickson v. Erickson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reversing for a new trial and holding that trial court should have admitted extrinsic evidence regarding testator’s intent, including conversations between testator and drafting attorney
• if testamentary instrument is clear and unambiguous, testator’s intent is to be determined: “[1] from the language of the will itself; and [2] without resort to extrinsic evidence of the testator’s intent”
• reforming based on scrivener’s error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Radin v. Jewish National Fund
  California Supreme Court· 2015-07-27· cited 32×
• Corcoran v. Department of Social Services
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2004-11-09· cited 28×
• Bocchino v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-08-18· cited 22×
• Carlson v. Sweeney, Dabagia, Donoghue, Thorne, Janes & Pagos
  Indiana Supreme Court· 2008-10-21· cited 20×
• Flannery v. McNamara
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2000-11-21· cited 17×
• Palozie v. Palozie
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-08-14· cited 15×
• Rutherford v. Slagle
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2025-05-27· cited 3×
• Kabel v. Rosen
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2022-10-04
• In Re Robert G. Kay Irrevocable Supplemental Needs Trust
  Vermont Superior Court· 2019-06-06

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Connecticut Junior Republic v. Sharon Hospital
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-08-10· cited 34×
• Czepiel v. Czepiel
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1959-05-26· cited 6×