In re Wilson

2 Citing cases

  1. Tang v. Avitable

    264 P.2d 835 (Ariz. 1953)   Cited 10 times

    We are concerned only with whether facts do exist which support the action taken in the lower court. See In re Wagner's Estate, 75 Ariz. 135, 252 P.2d 789; Wilson v. Flaccus, 74 Ariz. 197, 245 P.2d 962. The evidence in the record will support the finding, and it follows that the lower court did not err in making such finding. It follows there is no merit to the claim Avitable should have exercised the option.

  2. In re O'Connor's Estate

    74 Ariz. 248 (Ariz. 1952)   Cited 32 times
    Concluding that the evidence of O'Connor’s condition when she executed the will did not support the jury's finding of undue influence

    There is no occasion to restate the reasons back of these rules for we have decided hundreds of cases wherein the reasons for the rules have been expounded at length. On June 30, 1952, this court, in the case of Wilson v. Flaccus, 74 Ariz. 197, 245 P.2d 962, which involved a judgment founded on contradictory evidence, stated: "This court has said times without number that the trial court who had the opportunity to see, listen and gauge the demeanor of the witnesses on the stand is the best judge of conflicting testimony."