Summary
In Coffman v. Coffman, et al., 85 Va. 459, 8 S.E. 672, 2 L.R.A. 848, 17 Am. St. Rep. 69, we held that an instrument, although sufficiently executed to constitute a will, was not entitled to probate where it made no affirmative disposition of the property of the testator, but attempted merely to exclude an heir of the testator from participation in the estate.
Summary of this case from Delly v. Seaboard BankOpinion
Case No. S-03-CV-02414 FCD/JFM.
October 12, 2005
GORDON REES, LLP, J. Dominic Campodonico, Attorneys for Defendant WYETH.
LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS A. AMBROSE, Thomas A. Ambrose, Fairfield CA, Attorneys for Plaintiffs, FLOYD COFFMAN and VONNA COFFMAN.
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this action through their designated counsel that the above-captioned action be and hereby is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1).
IT IS SO ORDERED.