" Estate of Phillips, supra, 15 Wis.2d at 232. See also, Estate of Knutson, 275 Wis. 380, 82 N.W.2d 196 (1957); Estate of Gaudynski, 46 Wis.2d 393, 400, 175 N.W.2d 272 (1970); Estate of O'Loughlin, supra, at 149. The trial court stated in substance that the evidence demonstrated that Rev. Zanotti was a willing recipient of the numerous, valuable gifts given to himself and his wife by the testatrix, and that he was willing to charge her, perhaps overcharge her, for the services he rendered.
She also told Wachowiak that Alfred Zoschke at her request had made the arrangements for the consultation with Attorney Fritz. The trial judge, in concluding that Minna Becker had the testamentary capacity to make a will, relied upon the legal standards formulated by this court in Will of Wicker, 15 Wis.2d 86, 112 N.W.2d 137 (1961); Estate of Gaudynski, 46 Wis.2d 393, 175 N.W.2d 272 (1970); Estate of O'Loughlin, 50 Wis.2d 143, 183 N.W.2d 133 (1971). In the latter case, this court stated:
The record supports a finding that she was susceptible to his undue influence. In Estate of Gaudynski (1970), 46 Wis.2d 393, 400, 175 N.W.2d 272, it was explained as follows: "All influence on a person to make certain provisions in a will is not undue.
In Will of Freitag they were capsulized as follows: See, e.g., Ball v. Boston (1913), 153 Wis. 27, 141 N.W. 8; Will of Jackman (1870), 26 Wis. 104, 111, 112; Estate of Gaudynski (1970), 46 Wis.2d 393, 400, 175 N.W.2d 272.Estate of Larsen (1959), 7 Wis.2d 263, 269, 96 N.W.2d 489.
The size of and the variety of investments comprising the estate are not controlling. What is important is the testator's mental ability to deal with his property, such as it is, rationally in considering its nature, the objects of his bounty, and what he is attempting to do by way of disposition in the will. See Estate of Gaudynski (1970), 46 Wis.2d 393, 396, 175 N.W.2d 272. Undue influence.
Further, a testator is presumed to have testamentary capacity. Mueller v. Gaudynski , 46 Wis. 2d 393, 398, 175 N.W.2d 272 (1970). Therefore, the party opposing a testamentary document bears the burden to prove a lack of testamentary capacity at the time a testamentary document is executed by clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence.
A testator is presumed to have the capacity to make a will, and it is the opponent's burden to prove the testator lacked testamentary capacity. Mueller v. Gaudynski, 46 Wis. 2d 393, 398, 175 N.W.2d 272 (1970). Notably, the focus is on the testator's capacity at the specific time he or she executed the document in question.
ΒΆ 10. A testator is presumed to have the capacity to make a will. Miller v. Gaudynski, 46 Wis.2d 393, 398, 175 N.W.2d 272 (1970). The opponent must present evidence that the testator did not have a general, meaningful conception of the nature, extent and scope of his or her property and the natural objects of his or her bounty.