In re Balk's Estate

2 Citing cases

  1. McPeak v. McPeak

    233 Mich. App. 483 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 38 times
    In McPeak v McPeak, 233 Mich App 483, 487; 593 NW2d 180 (1999), this Court noted that exemplary damages are justified if the act or conduct complained of was voluntary, and the act inspired feelings of humiliation, outrage, and indignity.

    The timeliness of the evidence of undue influence bears on the weight of the evidence and not its admissibility. In re Balk's Estate, 289 Mich. 703, 706; 287 N.W. 351 (1939). Here, the complained-of evidence occurred between November 1990 and immediately following McPeak's death on April 26, 1992.

  2. Peareson v. McNabb

    190 S.W.2d 402 (Tex. Civ. App. 1945)   Cited 5 times

    In holding the evidence sufficient to have supported an affirmative finding of the jury on each one of these recited conditions, it would be supererogatory to detail the evidence upon which the findings might have been arrived at; indeed, under the uncontroverted testimony of the witnesses severally reporting each of them, these quoted and alleged "delusions" were each and all declarations of Mrs. Hollimon herself, hence were as such, as this court understands the rule in a single-shot case like this involving mental capacity alone — unmixed with any issue of undue influence — admissible as establishing her mental condition and consequent conduct; nor were they either too remote, or hearsay testimony, as appellant contends. McCormick Ray on Evidence, Sec. 419; also Secs. 417, 418, 420-423; Scott v. Townsend, 106 Tex. 322, 166 S.W. 1138, 1144; Shailer v. Bumstead, 99 Mass. 112; 11 Am. Eng. Ency. Law (1st Ed.), p. 156; In re Baker's Estate, 176 Cal. 430, syl. 9-11, 168 P. 881; In re Balk's Estate, 289 Mich. 703, 287 N.W. 351, 124 A.L.R. 431; In re Brown's Estate, 52 Idaho 286, 15 P.2d 604; Johnson v. Brown, 51 Tex. 65, 78 to 80; Reel's Ex'rs v. Reel, 8 N.C. 248, 9 Am.Dec. 632; State v. Hays, 22 La. Ann. 39; Wigmore, § 228, page 9; § 228, page 10; §§ 227-233; § 1734, page 106; § 1738, pages 119, 121; §§ 1740, 1790; 19 Words and Phrases, Perm. Ed., Hearsay. In this connection, an outstanding feature running through all the testimony for both sides — with perhaps no deviation from that statement by any witness for either — is the uniform recitation and opinion that the condition of Mrs. Hollimon's mind never changed, but always remained the same during the entire time that they knew her, and about which they testified; in other words, regardless of any and all subsequent developments of facts, she never receded from any of those positions or conditions.