Court Opinion

ID: 9519763
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:24:33.83862+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:51.612901
License: Public Domain

The following memorandum was filed June 3, 1952:
Per Curiam
{on motion for rehearing). Counsel for respondent in his brief on motion for rehearing, states that the opinion of the court is not clear as to what wills of the testator Attorney Meissner will be required to produce and testify to with respect to the same. We had assumed that it would be clear to anyone reading our opinion that our ruling was that because Attorney Meissner acted as attesting witness to the decedent’s contested will, he should be required to testify to any relevant and material matter regarding such will, including any former wills in his possession.
Motion for rehearing denied with costs.