On agreement to make mutual wills, Stephen and his two sisters entered into an agreement whereby the sisters agreed to will to Stephen, or in event Stephen predeceased them, to his wife, all property which they should receive from their father. Stephen did predecease the sisters, whereupon they executed new wills with no provision for Stephen's widow. Upon death of the last sister, the widow's bill for specific performance of the agreement was dismissed by the circuit court. In affirming on appeal, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the agreement as to Stephen and all other persons except the sisters being without consideration, the sisters were each bound only at the option of the other while both lived, and each could revoke with the other's permission. Execution of the new wills showed a common purpose to do away with all agreements to leave plaintiff anything, the will of each sister amounting to a revocation of the agreement, to which the consent of the other sister is fairly to be inferred in the absence in the contract of any stipulation requiring revocation to be in writing. Rose v. Southern Michigan National Bank of Coldwater, 328 Mich. 639, 44 N.W. (2d) 192 (1950).
Gordon W. Hueschen S. Ed.,
CONTRACTS-RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY-EFFECT OF MICHIGAN BENEFICIARY CONTRACT STATUTE,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol50/iss2/11