Kohler v. Arndt

Citations

• 7 Cal. Unrep. 289
• 87 P. 389

Syllabus

<p>Appeal — Exclusion of Evidence — Presumptions.—Where the court reserved its ruling on testimony objected to, and the record is silent as to what the ruling was, it must be presumed that the court excluded it, and it cannot be considered on appeal.</p> <p>Wills—Construction—Devisees.—Testator Gave His Property to his sister and his nephew, S., and “his sister, my niece,” and on the death of his sister added a codicil giving the share of his sister to “the other two residuary legatees therein named, S., and to his sister, my niece, whose name is Marie K., and whose residence is Salzwedel, Germany, share and share alike,” and confirming his will save as it was inconsistent with his codicil. The evidence showed that S. had a sister living, but that, her name was not Marie K., and that Marie K. was not his niece. Held, that the words referring to Marie K. were used to express the name and residence of testator’s niece, and not having accomplished that, were to be disregarded as surplusage.</p> <p>Will Contest — Compromise — Conclusiveness.—A person not a party to a will contest, nor to a compromise resulting therefrom, is not bound by it.</p>