This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Testatrix executed a valid holographic will, leaving the residue of her estate to Quinn (D), and Roxy Russell. Quinn was a friend of testatrix. Roxy Russell was a dog which was alive at the time the will was executed, but which predeceased testatrix. The will provided a specific bequest to testatrix's niece and sole heir at law (P). P claimed that the bequest to the dog was invalid, and that, as testatrix's heir, she was entitled to half of the estate. D was permitted to introduce evidence regarding testatrix's intent to leave her estate to D, and that she intended for D to care for the dog. The probate court found that D was the residual taker under the will, and construed the bequest to the dog as merely reflecting testatrix's intent that D care for the dog.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.