Estate of Olssen

RICHARDS, J.

This is an appeal from an order and decree admitting the olographic will of one Jack Olssen to probate upon the petition of the devisee named therein.

The following is a copy of the document in question:

“4/12/17th.

“mod dark 351 jones st progfeeld Apa Aparmass 201 I leev hore $2000.00 more1 cash mony

“Jack Olssen

“My my is cleere i leev hore alie

“Jack Olssen.”

The trial court in its findings construed the above document, with the proper spelling of the words therein, to read as follows:

[658]

“4/12/17th.

“Maude Clark, 351 Jones Street, Brookfield Apartments, Apartment 201, I leave her $2000.00 more, cash money.

“Jack Olssen.

“My mind is clear. I leave her all.

“Jack Olssen.”

To this reading the appellants offer no particular objection, but insist that the original document, even with this reading, has not the qualities of an olographic will, and is otherwise too indefinite as to its intent to be given effect.

[1]

The first arrow of the appellants is aimed at the date of the instrument, but we think this assault is sufficiently met by the decision of the supreme court in the matter of the

Estate of Chevallier,

159 Cal. 161, [113 Pac. 130], in which the figures “4-14-07” were held to amount to a sufficient dating of an olographic will. The appellant insists that the addition of the letters “th,” in connection with the figures at the head of the instrument in question here, renders their meaning uncertain, but we think that this is a hyper criticism, and that no real distinction can be found between the two cases.