Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marsden v. Puck, 13 N.W.2d 765.

23 citing documents.

In re Estate of: Alice I. Engman, Decedent. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Evidence which raises merely a suspicion and shows no more than a motive for exerting and an opportunity to exert undue influence is insufficient proof thereof, though coupled with proof of inequality in the terms of the will.” In re Mardsen’s Estate, 217 Minn. 1, 10
In Re the Estate of Opsahl 448 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 11-12
In Re Estate of Overton 417 N.W.2d 653 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
(6) Exercise of Influence Undue influence “must operate at the very time the will is made.” In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 9 , (emphasis in original).
In Re the Estate of Ristau 399 N.W.2d 101 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Such influence must overpower the will of the testator and “must operate at the very time the will is made and dominate and control its making.” In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 9
In Re the Estate of Lange 398 N.W.2d 569 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 11-12
Matter of Estate of Rechtzigel 385 N.W.2d 827 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
at 201 (quoting In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 11-12 , ).
Matter of Estate of Anderson 379 N.W.2d 197 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Although a confidential relationship may be a factor indicating undue influence, any evidence of intimacy or affection between blood relatives “negatives rather than proves undue influence.” In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 11-12
In Re Estate of Peterson 168 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1969
In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 9 , .
Gustafson v. Kilgore 168 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1969
It must operate at the very time the wilt is made and dominate and control its making.” In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 9 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765, 770 .
In Re Estate of Anthony 265 Minn. 382 Minn. 1963
745 ; In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 9 , 13 N.W.
In Re Estate of Holden 261 Minn. 527 Minn. 1962
745 , and In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N.W.
Larsen v. Bjerke 113 N.W.2d 87 Minn. 1962
The law applicable to this phase of the case is so adequately and completely stated in In re Estate of Mazanec, 204 Minn. 406 , , and In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765 , that it could serve no useful purpose to repeat it here.
In Re Estate of Reay 249 Minn. 123 Minn. 1957
[4] In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N.W.
Vangen v. Nelson 69 N.W.2d 630 Minn. 1955
Mason’s Dunnell, Minn. Probate Law (2 ed.) § 167; In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765 , and cases cited therein.
Olson v. Mork 35 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1948
In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765 , cited by proponents, and similar cases, are not in point, for the reason, among others, that none of them involved, as does the instant case, a bequest to a beneficiary standing in a confidential relation to the testator and actively participating in the preparation of the will.
In Re Estate of Olson 35 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1948
In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , , cited by proponents, and similar cases, are not in point, for the reason, among others, that none of them involved, as does the instant case, a bequest to a beneficiary standing in a confidential relation to the testator and actively participating in the preparation of the will.
Teschendorf v. Strangeway 27 N.W.2d 429 Minn. 1947
In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765 ; In re Estate of Stephens, 207 Minn. 597 , ; 6 Dunnell, Dig.
In Re Estate of Wilson 27 N.W.2d 429 Minn. 1947
In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , ; In re Estate of Stephens, 207 Minn. 597 , 293 N.W.
Ryan v. Meehan 18 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1945
See, In re Estate of Mazanec, 204 Minn. 406 , ; In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765 .
Pogue v. Fegan 17 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1944
In In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1, 13 , 13 N. W. (2d) 765, 772 , where the execution of the will was challenged and the attorneys who drew it and witnessed it did not take the witness stand, but tried the case for proponent, this court said: --- * We feel that they would have better served the interests of testatrix, who employed them, by becoming wit
In Re Estate of Cunningham 17 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1944
In In re Estate of Marsden, 217 Minn. 1 , 13 , , 772 , where the execution of the will was challenged and the attorneys who drew it and witnessed it did not take the witness stand, but tried the case for proponent, this court said: "* * * We feel that they would have better served the interests of testatrix, who employed them, by becoming witn
Brusven v. Ballord 14 N.W.2d 861 Minn. 1944
In Re Estate of Marsden 13 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1944