Court Opinion

ID: 9831487
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:08:26.657941+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:35.330028
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
We will note only two points raised in appellants’ motion for rehearing, namely: First, that we held that the $500 paid to appellee was not a valuable consideration; and, second, that we held the contribution bf appellants to appellee’s support during minority was not a valuable consideration. We did not so hold; nor do we think our opinion is susceptible of this construction. What we did hold was merely that the request of Frank .Stefka that appellee be paid ony $500 out of ’his estate was not a valuable consideration, but at most was a good or moral consideration. The $500 was, of course, a valuable consideration; but the request that only that amount be paid was nothing more than what we designated in our original opinion, a “moral’or good consideration.”
The motion has had our careful perusal, and is overruled,
Overruled.