Connecticut Junior Republic v. Sharon Hospital
Connecticut Supreme Court
448 A.2d 190 (1982)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
In 1960, Richards Emerson executed a will leaving the remainder of his estate in trust to seven named charities (1960 charities) (defendants). In 1969, Emerson executed a codicil replacing the 1960 charities with a new group of 11 charities (1969 charities) (plaintiffs). In 1975, Emerson requested that a second codicil be drafted that would merely change a classification of the trust for tax purposes. Emerson’s lawyer made the change but also mistakenly reinserted the 1960 charities into the trust. Emerson did not ask for this reinsertion and signed the codicil without knowing about the change in beneficiaries. The 1969 charities argued that the beneficiary list in the second codicil was a mistake and did not reflect Emerson’s intent and that, as a result, the second codicil should not be admitted to probate. The probate court admitted the second codicil after finding that extrinsic evidence of the attorney’s mistake was not admissible. The superior court affirmed. The 1969 charities appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Healey, J.)
Dissent (Peters, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
