Estate of Hurst v. Hurst

How courts have described this case

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

• reforming promissory note even though mistake did not concern an “antecedent existing legal right” but rather concerned legal effect of note itself
• reforming a promissory note held by a husband and wife as tenants in common when parol evidence established that they had requested their attorney to provide for joint tenancy with the right of survivorship
• reforming a promissory note held by a husband and wife as tenants in common when parol evidence established that they had requested their attorney to provide for joint tenancy with the right of survivorship
• reforming a promissory note held by a husband and wife as tenants in common when parol evidence established that they had requested their attorney to provide for joint tenancy with the right of survivorship
• reformation was appropriate remedy on facts of case even where mistake was one of law
• “When Chuck drafted his will to indicate he currently had two children, Alicia and Julie, his further references to ‘my children’ were to include them and to exclude Lori and Todd, who were alive at the time the will was drafted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).