Fleming v. Morrison
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
72 N.E.2d 499 (1904)
- Written by Christine Raino, JD
Facts
Francis Butterfield had his attorney, Sidney Goodrich, draft a will leaving his entire estate to Mary Fleming (defendant) as a ploy to induce Mary Fleming to have sex with him. After Butterfield signed the will and Goodrich signed as one of three required attesting witnesses, Butterfield disclosed to Goodrich that he did not intend this will to be a real will, and that it was “made for a purpose.” Butterfield then had the will signed by two additional witnesses, but he did not tell those witnesses that he did not intend the will to be used as a real will. Mary Fleming’s attempt to enforce Butterfield’s will was challenged and the lower court admitted extrinsic evidence. The case ultimately was appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
