Court Opinion

ID: 9829251
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:07:48.452707+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:58.973356
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In our original opinion, we copied verbatim the will and its codicils, as they appeared in the statement of facts. Counsel for all parties here have filed an agreement that the last codicil in fact, bore the date of March 25, 1911, and by inadvertence such date was omitted from the statement of facts on file here. Motion for certiorari is made to correct the record. We overrule this motion, as it would ef-*1090feet only some of the language of the opinion with out changing our conclusion. The last codicil follows one dated December 4, 1916. The testatrix must have interlined such codicil above the last one. She therefore in 1916 reaffirmed in effect the codicil giving to the children of Tom Houston an interest in her estate. This was. in truth, though not literally, one of her last earthly commands. .Our decision makes it effective. To do less, is to ignore her plain 'intent. To sustain appellees, is to exalt technical man-made rules of construction above the cardinal rule governing all others, viz., to ascertain the real intent of the testator and to give it effect, when not in contravention to some law or public policy.
Motion overruled.