DISPUTED WILL CASE.
■■>■'■• ....;.■■■... ■■•■■ ■ .-■•■.■•■■.•■..■■-■'.■■ ■:!■'■■■■..>'■". -.* ';.•.>'. CODICIL HELD TO BE VALID. ; By -telegraph.—Press AKfittaHbn—CfcpyrisM, ■ ■< London, February 20. In the disputed will codicil case, the late Miss Matting! solicitor gave evidence that his client made many wills ■;'&%{ -various, times; , : She left Dr-, Bryan (her grand-nephew) £9000- in 1904 ; then the amount was • altered at various times, until he.was cut, off in 190S with £20. ■';.■■''"•■.-'- '"■"•'.' * , Miss /.Mattingley's- nurse-stated that the testatrix was quite sane on the day that she signed the codiciL in which she had left her estate 3 to. Bryan. ; " ;V '. ■ ■'■'■ '"' ':'■■' '■''' £& A servant gave evidence that miss Mattingley tried to'burn the codicil, saying that she had left Br; Bryan more than he deserved. ■••■; '■''"•■;'"■ '' The jury' found that the testatrix was sane, that the codicil was ; duly executed, and that Dr. Bryan 'had not influenced her.. \''V'v-.'-••■-.--;
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19130222.2.69
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15234, 22 February 1913, Page 7
Word Count
133DISPUTED WILL CASE. New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15234, 22 February 1913, Page 7
Using This Item
NZME is the copyright owner for the New Zealand Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of NZME. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries and NZME.