{ "id": 1719789, "name": "Euna SCRITCHFIELD et al v. Ralph Robert LOYD, Executor", "name_abbreviation": "Scritchfield v. Loyd", "decision_date": "1979-10-29", "docket_number": "79-270", "first_page": "24", "last_page": "26", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "267 Ark. 24" }, { "type": "parallel", "cite": "589 S.W.2d 557" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ark.", "id": 8808, "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 34, "name_long": "Arkansas", "name": "Ark." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "171 P. 2d 131", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "P.2d", "year": 1946, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "75 Cal. App. 2d 628", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Cal. App. 2d", "case_ids": [ 4472717 ], "year": 1946, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/cal-app-2d/75/0628-01" ] }, { "cite": "82 N.E. 1067", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.", "year": 1907, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "77 Ohio St. 104", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ohio St.", "case_ids": [ 309782 ], "year": 1907, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ohio-st/77/0104-01" ] }, { "cite": "196 A. 2d 297", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "A.2d", "year": 1964, "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "413 Pa. 91", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Pa.", "case_ids": [ 1888632 ], "year": 1964, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/pa/413/0091-01" ] }, { "cite": "44 A.L.R. 3d 701", "category": "reporters:specialty", "reporter": "A.L.R. 3d", "year": 1964, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "\u00a7 14" } ], "opinion_index": 0 } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 277, "char_count": 3177, "ocr_confidence": 0.925, "pagerank": { "raw": 5.527646540942415e-08, "percentile": 0.34611631797838405 }, "sha256": "0d6de1122b29f156d210eb0d2c2390f966bf70d5c9038feac5c274204849aff5", "simhash": "1:25cafafc3c641fe0", "word_count": 569 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:44:49.696704+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "Harris, C.J., not participating." ], "parties": [ "Euna SCRITCHFIELD et al v. Ralph Robert LOYD, Executor" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Conley Byrd, Justice.\nBy this appeal appellants, Euna Scritchf\u00edeld, et al, collateral heirs of Johnnie D. Loyd, deceased, contend that the signature of Johnnie D. Loyd appearing in the attestation clause of his will does not meet the requirements of Ark. Stat. Ann. \u00a7 60-403 (Repl. 1971), requiring that the testator\u2019s \u201csignature must be at the end of the instrument.\u201d The stipulation entered into by the parties shows the following:\n\u2018 \u2018 Marie Hutto, if called as a witness in this cause, would testify in substance as follows: \u2018My name is Marie Hutto. I reside at Damascus, Arkansas, where my husband, Ray Hutto, and I operate a feed mill. On April 20, 1976, Johnnie David Loyd came to our place of business, bringing with him a blank form headed \u201cLast Will and Testament\u201d and asked me to help him make a will. I told Mr. Loyd I did not know anything about these matters and he then asked if I would write what he told me to in the various blanks in the form, as he requested. I did so. Under Mr. Loyd\u2019s instructions, I filled in the blanks in the will form, and this is the instrument which has been tendered for probate as Mr. Loyd\u2019s will. All handwritten portions of the will were written by me, except as hereinafter excepted. Mr. Loyd signed his name \u201cJohnnie D. Loyd\u2019 \u2019 in the upper left hand portion of the will, just below the printed words \u201cLast Will and Testament\u201d and just above the start of the printed portion of the form. He signed the name \u201cJohnnie D. Loyd\u201d in the attestation paragraph below the body of the will. I signed my name as a Notary Public on the line at the end of the will and inserted my commission expiration date to the left of my signature. Ray Hutto and Ralph Porter were also in our place of business at this time, and at Mr. Loyd\u2019s request, they signed their respective names as witnesses to the will.\nBased upon the foregoing facts the trial court ruled that the will was valid. We agree with the trial court.\nThere is a distinct conflict among the authorities as to whether a signature in an attestation clause qualifies as a signature \u201cat the end.\u201d See 44 A.L.R. 3d 701 \u00a7 14. Appellants rely upon In re Estate of George H. Glaze, Deceased, 413 Pa. 91, 196 A. 2d 297 (1964) and Sears v. Sears, 77 Ohio St. 104, 82 N.E. 1067 (1907), to support their contention that a signature in the attestation clause does not constitute a signature \u201cat the end\u201d of the instrument. However, we believe the better rule to be that where the testator places his signature in the attestation clause because he believes that it belongs there and with the requisite testamentary intent, it constitutes a sufficient compliance with the statute requiring the signature to be \u201cat the end.\u201d See In re Morey\u2019s Estate, 75 Cal. App. 2d 628, 171 P. 2d 131 (1946) and In re Schiele\u2019s Estate, 51 S. 2d 287 (Fla. 1951).\nAffirmed.\nHarris, C.J., not participating.\nAttached hereto as an appendix is a photostatic copy of the will.", "type": "majority", "author": "Conley Byrd, Justice." } ], "attorneys": [ "Clark & McNeil, for appellants.", "Guy H. Jones, Phil Stratton, Guy H. Jones, Jr. and Casey Jones, by: Phil Stratton, for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "Euna SCRITCHFIELD et al v. Ralph Robert LOYD, Executor\n79-270\n589 S.W. 2d 557\nOpinion delivered October 29, 1979\nClark & McNeil, for appellants.\nGuy H. Jones, Phil Stratton, Guy H. Jones, Jr. and Casey Jones, by: Phil Stratton, for appellee." }, "file_name": "0024-01", "first_page_order": 54, "last_page_order": 56 }