green
Positive treatment
7.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1965 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1965
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Estate of Schmidt
Pa.R.A.P. 302(a); In re Abrams’ Estate, 419 Pa. 92, 98 , 213 A.2d 638, 641 (1965); DeMatteis v. DeMatteis, 399 Pa.Super. 421, 435-36 , 582 A.2d 666, 673 (1990).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Estate of Fickert
Abrams Will, 419 Pa. 92, 101 , 213 A.2d 638, 643 (1965); Holtz Will, 422 Pa. 540, 547 , 222 A.2d 885, 889 (1966); Dettra Will, 415 Pa. 197, 201 , 202 A.2d 827, 830 (1964).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Estate of Clark
(2×)
Abrams Will, 419 Pa. 92, 98 , 213 A.2d 638, 641 (1965); Kerr v. O'Donovan, 389 Pa. 614, 623 , 134 A.2d 213, 217 (1957). [1] Once the contestant proceeds with his proof, there are two viable rules of law in this Commonwealth which allow the contestant to shift the onus of going forward with evidence back to the proponent.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Kay Estate
Shewchuk Estate, 444 Pa. 349, 260 , 282 A.2d 307, 313 (1971); Mintz Trust, 444 Pa. 189, 196 , 282 A.2d 295, 299 (1971); Gramm Estate, 437 Pa. 381, 386 , 263 A.2d 445, 447 (1970); Abrams Will, 419 Pa. 92, 101 , 213 A.2d 638, 643 (1965); Pusey’s Estate, 321 Pa. 248, 260 , 184 A. 844, 849 (1936).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Heiney v. Will
Shewchuk Estate, 444 Pa. 249, 260 , 282 A.2d 307, 313 (1971); Mintz Trust, 444 Pa. 189, 196 , 282 A.2d 295, 299 (1971); Gramm Estate, 437 Pa. 381, 386 , 263 A.2d 445, 447 (1970); Abrams Will, 419 Pa. 92, 101 , 213 A.2d 638, 643 (1965).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Taylor Will
In Abrams Will, 419 Pa. 92, 99 , 213 A. 2d 638, 642 (1965), Mr. Justice Jones succinctly restated the law: “As to undue influence, certain principles are established beyond question: (1) there is a presumption of the absence of undue influence and the initial burden of proof is on the contestant; (2) absent evidence of weakened intellect, the burden is upon those asserting it to prove undue influence even though the bulk of the estate is left to those occupying a confidential relationship; (3) when there is evidence of confidential relation coupled with weakened intellect, the burden of proo…
discussed
Cited "see"
Walney v. SWEPI LP
(2×)
See Fedun v. Mike's Cafe, Inc. , 204 Pa.Super. 356 , 204 A.2d 776 , 781 (1964), aff'd , 419 Pa. 607 , 213 A.2d 638 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Estate of Agostini
See In re Estate of Abrams, 419 Pa. 92, 100 , 213 A.2d 638, 643 (1965); In re Franz’ Estate, 368 Pa. 618 , 84 A.2d 292 (1951) and compare with In re Estate of Clark, 461 Pa. 52 , 334 A.2d 628 (1975) and Fees v. Green, 365 Pa. 368 , 75 A.2d 602 (1950).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harkins v. Zamichieli
(2×)
See also Fedun v. Mike’s Cafe, Inc., 204 Pa.Super. 356 , 204 A.2d 776 (1964), aff’d, 419 Pa. 607 , 213 A.2d 638 (1965); Langer v. Superior Steel Corp., 105 Pa.Super. 579 , 161 A. 571 (1932). 3 Here the complaint alleges a promise by appellees intended to induce appellants’ forbearance, and that there was such forbearance.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fedun
v.
Mike's Cafe, Inc., Appellant.
v.
Mike's Cafe, Inc., Appellant.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Sep 29, 1965.
Bell, C.J., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Brien and Roberts.
Published
Before BELL, C.J., MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.
Herbert H. Hadra, with him Maurice Freedman and Robert H. Arronson, for appellants.
Joseph Skale, for appellee.
OPINION PER CURIAM, September 29, 1965:
Order affirmed.