Opinion
No. 6374.
Decided April 21, 1942.
1. WILLS. Conflicting evidence presented question for jury as to whether testator was incompetent at time of execution of will. 2. APPEAL AND ERROR. Where evidence is in conflict, Supreme Court will not weigh evidence and substitute its judgment for that of jury and trial court.
See 28 R.C.L., 405; 5 C.J.S. Appeal and Error, sec. 1653.
Appeal from District Court, Fourth District, Utah County; Dallas H. Young, Judge.
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of John H. Gordon, deceased, wherein Maud Olsen and others filed a will contest, opposed by Curtis Gordon and others. From a judgment revoking letters testamentary theretofore issued, the proponents appeal.
Affirmed.
Brockbank Pope, of Provo, for appellants.
Christenson Christenson, of Provo, for respondents.
Appeal from the verdict of a jury and judgment thereon in a will contest, holding John H. Gordon incompetent to execute the will and revoking letters testamentary thereto fore issued. But one question is presented on this appeal: Are the verdict and judgment sustained by the evidence? 1, 2 No useful purpose would be subserved by setting forth the testimony of the various witnesses. We have read the record carefully. The evidence is in conflict, but the jury could well have come to the conclusion it did. It is not for us to weigh the evidence and substitute our judgment for that of the jury and trial court.
The judgment is affirmed. Costs to respondents.
MOFFAT, C.J., and WOLFE, McDONOUGH, and PRATT, JJ., concur.