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

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.

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