In Estate of Hite (1909) 155 Cal. 436, a codicil reaffirmed the will. Two parties challenged the distribution under the codicil on undue influence, want of capacity, and non-execution grounds. (Id. at pp. 438- 439.) The will contained a no contest clause. The Supreme Court held the will's no contest clause applied to the challenges to the distribution under the codicil. The Supreme Court held: "What was the purpose and intent of the testator in the case of the will under consideration? So far as language goes, in both codicils he declares that he has reread, reconsidered, reordained, and republished, ratified and confirmed his will as of the dates respectively of the codicils. Thus the language of the codicils merely modifies the original will to the extent of the legacies, but expressly reaffirms it in every other particular. By such language the codicils become as much an integral part of the will as though their purport had been expressed in one of the original clauses thereof. Moreover, the purpose which the testator sought to subserve, as before discussed, forbids as well a contest of any part as of the whole. The same reasons moving him to forbid a contest in the one case, would operate in the other." (Estate of Hite, supra, 155 Cal. at p. 447.)