
    Curtis’s Estate.
    
      Wills — Revocation—Beneficiary under revoked will — Issue devisavit vel non — Refusal.
    A beneficiary under a will revoked by the testator has no standing to contest the validity of a subsequent will in which such beneficiary is not named, and an issue devisavit vel non petitioned for by such contestant is properly refused.
    Argued March 21, 1916.
    Appeal, No. 23, Jan. T., 1916, by William de Forrest Curtis, from decree of O. C. Philadelphia Co., Jan. T., 1915, No. 419, refusing an issue devisavit vel non in Estate of L. Scovill Curtis, deceased.
    Before Brown, C. J., Mestrezat, Potter, Moschzisker and Frazer, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    
      Petition for issue devisavit vel non. Before Anderson, J.
    The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case.
    The court dismissed the petition. William de Forrest Curtis appealed.
    
      Error assigned was in refusing an issue devisavit vel non.
    
      Chester N. Farr, Jr., with him Oswald Chew, for appellant.
    
      John C. Johnson, with him Joseph H. Taulane, for appellees.
    April 17, 1916 :
   Per Curiam,

Whether the testator was competent to execute the will dated November 11,1914, is, so far as this appellant is concerned, immaterial. He asks for an issue devisavit vel non because he claims to have an interest in the estate of the testator under an earlier will, executed in 1907. It clearly appeared from the testimony that the testator had destroyed that will when he was fully competent to do so, and this fact, properly found by the court below, left the appellant without any interest in the estate of the testator and with no standing as a contestant of the will executed in 1914.

Decree affirmed at appellant’s costs.  