Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 1 · column 1 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
By DAPHNE HUTCHINSON RapiwhaniMirk Vw» Staff Wrilrr
Part II: The Plaintiff s Case
The echoes of the first words in the plaintiffs opening statement were still hanging in the air when an objection signaled the start of a procedural battle which dominated the fourth day of the Holmes Estate trial.
Dr. Peter Nielsen’s side, represented by Roland Hartshorn from Alexandria and local lawyers Peter Luke and George Davis, had rested their case. On behalf of Betty Paleologos, challenger of Col. Earl Holmes' bequest of his entire $1.8 million estate to Dr. Nielson, attorney Larry Elgin in his opening statement told the jury “we will show evidence that what he (Col. Holmes) thought he was signing was different” than the document that was actually witnessed and executed on October 27, 1979.
Elgin's contention provoked an immediate objection. Referring to authorities and precedents stacked on the table beside him, Luke argued that the plaintiffs hadn’t charged fraud by trickery or deceit in their pleadings and therefore, under procedural rules, were prohibited from introducing evidence on that point.
“The only thing we need to plead is that this is not the will of Col. Holmes,” Elgin countered, pointing to' the typed, one-paragraph document. He maintained that Mrs. Paleologos’ side is entitled to show every
79.7%