interpreting a will and noting that “the coordinating particle ‘or,’ being disjunctive in nature, expresses an alternative”
How later courts described this case
- interpreting a will and noting that “the coordinating particle ‘or,’ being disjunctive in nature, expresses an alternative”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ON PLAINTIFF-APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR REHEARING
The fourth sentence in the second paragraph appearing under heading 5a. Language of the Joint Will in our original opinion reads: “Those decisions were reached after a conventional trial; they were not the summary disposition we are asked to make here from the will itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence that is available.” In the interest of accuracy, that sentence is deleted and substituted therefor is the sentence reading: “Those decisions were reached after a conventional trial or, as was the situation in Harrell, *313 from the construction of an admittedly contractual joint will; they were not the summary disposition we are asked to make here from the questionable will itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence that is available.”
The points of error presented in plaintiff-appellants’ motion for rehearing have been reviewed and considered. The subject matters of these points were considered in the disposition made of the appeal in our original opinion, and the motion for rehearing has not persuaded us to depart from that disposition.
Plaintiff-appellants’ motion for rehearing is overruled.