Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1946–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hale v. Bradleygreen2 sentences2018See Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn. App. 651, 664 , 478 S.W.2d 57, 62 (Tenn. 1970) (applying the rebuttable presumption based on an attestation clause with no discussion of whether the clause was notarized); see also In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320, 321 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991) (holding that the evidence did not contradict an un-notarized attestation clause). 12 Conclusion The judgment of the Probate Court of Shelby County is reversed. 1992Austin contends that the cases relied upon by Greer — Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn.App. 651 , 478 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn.App.1970); Needham v. Doyle, 39 Tenn.App. 597 , 286 S.W.2d 601 (1955); and Miller v. Thrasher, 36 Tenn.App. 88 , 251 S.W.2d 446 (1952), and In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320 (Tenn.App.1991) — all involve wills which contained an attestation clause. | 3 | 4 |
Whitlow v. Weavergreen2 sentences2018See Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn. App. 651, 664 , 478 S.W.2d 57, 62 (Tenn. 1970) (applying the rebuttable presumption based on an attestation clause with no discussion of whether the clause was notarized); see also In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320, 321 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991) (holding that the evidence did not contradict an un-notarized attestation clause). 12 Conclusion The judgment of the Probate Court of Shelby County is reversed. 2018See Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn. App. 651, 664 , 478 S.W.2d 57, 62 (Tenn. 1970) (applying the rebuttable presumption based on an attestation clause with no discussion of whether the clause was notarized); see also In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320, 321 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991) (holding that the evidence did not contradict an un-notarized attestation clause). 12 Conclusion The judgment of the Probate Court of Shelby County is reversed. | 2 | 3 |
Leathers v. Binkleygreen2 sentences2023Respectfully, this argument is unavailing. “[C]ourts will sustain a will as legally executed if it can be done consistently with statutory requirements.” In re Estate of Fant, 2017 WL 3492007 , at *5 (citing Leathers v. Binkley, 264 S.W.2d 561, 563 (Tenn. 1954)). 1970The public policy of the State of Tennessee with reference to the establishment of wills was very succinctly stated by Justice Gailor of our Tennessee Supreme Court in Leathers v. Binkley, 196 Tenn. 80 , 264 S.W.2d 561 , when he said, “To protect the right of testamentary disposition of property, we must sustain a will as legally executed if it is possible to do so, Sizer’s Pritchard on Wills, Secs. 384, 386, et seq.; 57 Am.Jur., Wills, sec. 218. | 1 | 2 |
Dobson v. Shorttgreen1 sentence2018Rather, “the presumption of the validity of the execution of the will [must] be overcome by positive testimony from an attesting witness contrary to the recitals contained in the attestation clause.” Dobson v. Shortt, 929 S.W.2d 347, 350 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Robinsongreen1 sentence2001The courts are concerned not with the relationship but with the abuse of the relationship." Robinson v. Robinson, 517 S. W. 2d 202, 206 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1974). -8- The case of, Ballew, 309 S.W.2d 125 , is distinguished from the instant case because the will in Ballew did not have an attestation clause and it was written on the back of a check book register. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Beadles v. Alexander
green
2 sentences1954We are familiar with the rule laid down in Beadles v. Alexander, 68 Tenn. 604 and referred to in the opinion in the case of Parker v. West, 199 S. W. (2d) 928 , to the effect that proof of the signature of the testator and of the signature of the attesting witnesses, nothing else appearing, raises a presumption that the witnesses signed according to the provisions of the attestation clause preceding the signature. 1948We felt compelled to reach this conclusion by reason of the holding in Rose v. Allen, Ex'r, 41 Tenn. 23 , 28, to the effect that where the witnesses deny their attestations "the evidence in favor of the will must be clear and full to substantiate it," and upon the holding in Beadles v. Alexander, 68 Tenn. 604 , that a presumption of compliance with the statute does not arise by the mere execution and witnessing of the paperwriting "if there be positive testimony on the subject by the subscribing witness or otherwise." In the petition to rehear it is suggested that "when the Court was dealing w | 3 | 1946–1954 |
Miller v. Thrasher
green
2 sentences1992Austin contends that the cases relied upon by Greer — Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn.App. 651 , 478 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn.App.1970); Needham v. Doyle, 39 Tenn.App. 597 , 286 S.W.2d 601 (1955); and Miller v. Thrasher, 36 Tenn.App. 88 , 251 S.W.2d 446 (1952), and In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320 (Tenn.App.1991) — all involve wills which contained an attestation clause. 1992Austin contends that the cases relied upon by Greer — Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn.App. 651 , 478 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn.App.1970); Needham v. Doyle, 39 Tenn.App. 597 , 286 S.W.2d 601 (1955); and Miller v. Thrasher, 36 Tenn.App. 88 , 251 S.W.2d 446 (1952), and In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320 (Tenn.App.1991) — all involve wills which contained an attestation clause. | 2 | 1955–1992 |
In Re ESTATE OF Thomas Grady CHASTAIN
green
1 sentence2024Id. 10 The statute authorizes the use of self-proving affidavits to prove a will “only if a will is uncontested.” In re Est. of Chastain, 401 S.W.3d at 620 . 11 “An attestation clause is a provision at the end of a typical will that is signed by the witnesses and recites the formalities required by the applicable statute.” In re Est. of Boye, No. E2006-01441-COA- R3-CV, 2007 WL 3124424 , at *1 n.2 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2007). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
In re Estate of Ross
green
1 sentence2018Id. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Ballew v. Ballew
green
1 sentence2001The courts are concerned not with the relationship but with the abuse of the relationship." Robinson v. Robinson, 517 S. W. 2d 202, 206 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1974). -8- The case of, Ballew, 309 S.W.2d 125 , is distinguished from the instant case because the will in Ballew did not have an attestation clause and it was written on the back of a check book register. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Needham v. Doyle
green
2 sentences1992Austin contends that the cases relied upon by Greer — Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn.App. 651 , 478 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn.App.1970); Needham v. Doyle, 39 Tenn.App. 597 , 286 S.W.2d 601 (1955); and Miller v. Thrasher, 36 Tenn.App. 88 , 251 S.W.2d 446 (1952), and In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320 (Tenn.App.1991) — all involve wills which contained an attestation clause. 1992Austin contends that the cases relied upon by Greer — Whitlow v. Weaver, 63 Tenn.App. 651 , 478 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn.App.1970); Needham v. Doyle, 39 Tenn.App. 597 , 286 S.W.2d 601 (1955); and Miller v. Thrasher, 36 Tenn.App. 88 , 251 S.W.2d 446 (1952), and In re Estate of Bradley, 817 S.W.2d 320 (Tenn.App.1991) — all involve wills which contained an attestation clause. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Ball v. Miller
green
2 sentences1970Compare: Ball v. Miller, 31 Tenn.App. 271 , 214 S.W.2d 446 .” Justice Tomlinson, in the second paragraph of his opinion in Fann v. Fann, recognized that there were many evils which could result from attesting witnesses denying the solemn recitation contained in the attestation clause above their genuine signatures. 1970Compare: Ball v. Miller, 31 Tenn.App. 271 , 214 S.W.2d 446 .” Justice Tomlinson, in the second paragraph of his opinion in Fann v. Fann, recognized that there were many evils which could result from attesting witnesses denying the solemn recitation contained in the attestation clause above their genuine signatures. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Marr v. Marr
green
1 sentence1954Crutcher v. Crutcher, 30 Tenn. (11 Humph.) 377; Marr v. Marr, 39 Tenn. (2 Head) 303 ; R. | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Campbell v. Henley
green
1 sentence1954As, therefore, the natural inference to be drawn from the attestation clause at the foot of a testamentary paper is, that the writer meant to execute it in the presence of witnesses, and that it was incomplete, in his apprehension of it, till that operation was performed — the presumption of law is against a testamentary paper, with an attestation clause not subscribed by witnesses; where the testator is not proved, as he is not suggested even in the present case, to have been prevented by any “act of God” from going on to complete it, had he so intended.’ ” To the same effect our Supreme Cour | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Parker v. West
green
1 sentence1954We are familiar with the rule laid down in Beadles v. Alexander, 68 Tenn. 604 and referred to in the opinion in the case of Parker v. West, 199 S. W. (2d) 928 , to the effect that proof of the signature of the testator and of the signature of the attesting witnesses, nothing else appearing, raises a presumption that the witnesses signed according to the provisions of the attestation clause preceding the signature. | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Dietz v. Gallaher
green
2 sentences1954Douglass & Co. v. Harkrender, 62 Tenn. (3 Baxt.) 114; Davis v. Davis, 74 Tenn. (6 Lea) 543; Saunders v. Hackney, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea) 194; Dietz v. Gallaher, 169 Tenn. 435 , 88 S. W. 2d 993, 997 .” Mrs. Bright drafted the attestation clause, but left the date thereon blank, and no witnesses ever signed. 1954Douglass & Co. v. Harkrender, 62 Tenn. (3 Baxt.) 114; Davis v. Davis, 74 Tenn. (6 Lea) 543; Saunders v. Hackney, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea) 194; Dietz v. Gallaher, 169 Tenn. 435 , 88 S. W. 2d 993, 997 .” Mrs. Bright drafted the attestation clause, but left the date thereon blank, and no witnesses ever signed. | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Simmons v. Leonard
green
2 sentences1948Our case of Simmons v. Leonard, 91 Tenn. 183 , 18 S.W. 280 , 30 Am. 1948Our case of Simmons v. Leonard, 91 Tenn. 183 , 18 S.W. 280 , 30 Am. | 1 | 1948–1948 |
Rose v. Allen
green
2 sentences1948We felt compelled to reach this conclusion by reason of the holding in Rose v. Allen, Ex'r, 41 Tenn. 23 , 28, to the effect that where the witnesses deny their attestations "the evidence in favor of the will must be clear and full to substantiate it," and upon the holding in Beadles v. Alexander, 68 Tenn. 604 , that a presumption of compliance with the statute does not arise by the mere execution and witnessing of the paperwriting "if there be positive testimony on the subject by the subscribing witness or otherwise." In the petition to rehear it is suggested that "when the Court was dealing w 1948We felt compelled to reach this conclusion by reason of the holding in Rose v. Allen, Ex'r, 41 Tenn. 23 , 28, to the effect that where the witnesses deny their attestations "the evidence in favor of the will must be clear and full to substantiate it," and upon the holding in Beadles v. Alexander, 68 Tenn. 604 , that a presumption of compliance with the statute does not arise by the mere execution and witnessing of the paperwriting "if there be positive testimony on the subject by the subscribing witness or otherwise." In the petition to rehear it is suggested that "when the Court was dealing w | 1 | 1948–1948 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.