And later on:
"... The courts should adopt this trend when they exercise the discretion given to them in section 25(a) of the Inheritance Law to execute a will despite a defect or a formal defect that occurred in it. The formal requirements set by the legislature are not an end in themselves, but rather a means intended to give expression to the testator's discretion. An interpretation according to which a defect must be distinguished from defect in terms of the severity of its bad defect while examining its severity with respect to the type of will in which the defect occurred - with regard to the degree of persuasion required in section 25 of the Inheritance Law and the exercise of the court's discretion in its operation - is a more appropriate and moderate affair that adapts itself to the special circumstances of the case at hand. This interpretation will more appropriately preserve the delicate balance between the dignity of the dead and the dignity of the living - those who claim the invalidation of the will - while respecting the will of the deceased whose existence we are commanded to exist..."
Although it is possible to make a distinction between the level of persuasion required in relation to each of the alleged defects, some of them in relation to the notary's work and its procedures, and another argument relates to the manner in which the will was verified and its contents, in practice I have found that after reviewing the rule that was submitted and after hearing the testimonies of the parties and witnesses, I have no doubt that the will reflects the free and true will of the deceased, and therefore this matter has been proven in any case to the standard required by section 25.
The will reflects the deceased's wishes:
- In his testimony, the notary described how the deceased came to him, how she gave him her will and how the will was drafted.
Indeed, as stated above, there is no dispute that there was a defect in the wording of the notarized approval of the will, but that the notary referred directly to these defects in his testimony, confirmed the defects and explained them.