In re Johnson's Estate

13 Citing cases

  1. In re Hallitt's Estate

    37 N.W.2d 662 (Mich. 1949)   Cited 7 times

    Because the judgment for proponents was entered contrary to the verdict of the jury, for contestants, the evidence presented must be considered in the light most favorable to contestants. In re Frazee's Estate, 307 Mich. 404; and In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366. Nevertheless, the burden of establishing lack of testamentary capacity is upon the contestants, because mental competency is presumed by statute. 3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 14212 (4 Comp. Laws 1948, § 617.58 [Stat.

  2. Estate of Alegria

    87 Cal.App.2d 645 (Cal. Ct. App. 1948)   Cited 16 times

    estator held not an insane delusion where contestant had allowed taxes to go delinquent, properties had been sold for delinquent taxes, and judgment had been obtained against contestant and properties sold on execution; Estate of Struve, 100 Cal.App. 255 [ 279 P. 846], belief of testatrix that two sons had taken advantage of her by recording two deeds conveying property to them held not an insane delusion where testatrix had signed the deeds and placed them in escrow to remain until her death and sons had recorded the deeds and where, when the testatrix learned that they had done so, she apparently became very angry with them expressing to them and to others that they had violated the agreement that the deeds should remain in escrow until her death; Estate of Selb, 84 Cal.App.2d 46 [ 190 P.2d 277], belief of testatrix that daughter and grandson had "hounded her about her property" held not an insane delusion where based on their efforts to induce her to sell her home and go elsewhere; In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366 [ 13 N.W.2d 852], belief of testatrix that her nephew was a worthless character and was trying to get her money and property held not an insane delusion where nephew had tried to borrow money from her; Higgins v. Smith, (Mo. App.) 150 S.W.2d 539, 543, belief of testatrix that her relatives were persecuting her and were mean and unkind to her held not an insane delusion where relatives had objected to her associating with a certain man, to her keeping late hours with him, and to her going to Philadelphia with him; Firestine v. Atkinson, 206 Iowa 151 [ 218 N.W. 293], belief of a testator that his illegitimate daughter was an immoral woman was not proof of an insane delusion where there was no evidence that the belief was harbored without evidence to support it.; Bain v. Cline, 24 Ore. 175 [33 P. 542, 41 Am.St.Rep. 851], belief of a testator that certain of his children had wronged him by taking sides with their mother in a divorce suit, had testified falsely against him, did not respect

  3. Gestner v. Divine

    519 P.3d 439 (Idaho 2022)   Cited 3 times

    The testator must at the time of making his will have sufficient mentality to enable him to know what property he possesses and of which he is making a testamentary disposition, to consider and know who are the natural objects of his bounty, and to understand what the disposition is that he is making of his property by his will. Id. (quoting In re Johnson's Est. , 308 Mich. 366, 13 N.W.2d 852, 855 (1944) ). The district court concluded that the evidence "overwhelmingly" supported the conclusion that Marjorie had full testamentary capacity when she executed the 2018 Amendment.

  4. In re Estate of Stibor

    96 Idaho 162 (Idaho 1974)   Cited 19 times
    Holding that generally, in order to make a valid will, the testator must "have sufficient mentality to enable him to know what property he possesses and of which he is making a testamentary disposition, to consider and know who are the natural objects of his bounty, and to understand what the disposition is that he is making of his property by his will"

    "[i]n general the requisite is that the testator must at the time of making his will have sufficient mentality to enable him to know what property he possesses and of which he is making a testamentary disposition, to consider and know who are the natural objects of his bounty, and to understand what the disposition is that he is making of his property by his will. In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366, 13 N.W.2d 852, at page 885." (Emphasis added.)

  5. In re Anderson Estate

    353 Mich. 169 (Mich. 1958)   Cited 9 times

    All such matters have been before this Court on numerous occasions in will contest cases, and each has been held to have no bearing on the mental capacity of the deceased to make a will. Spratt v. Spratt, 76 Mich. 384; Prentis v. Bates, 88 Mich. 567; Page v. Beach, 134 Mich. 51; Hibbard v. Baker, 141 Mich. 124; Blackman v. Andrews, 150 Mich. 322; Leffingwell v. Bettinghouse, 151 Mich. 513; In re Murray's Estate, 219 Mich. 70; In re Littlejohn's Estate, 239 Mich. 630; In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366; In re Calhoun Estate, 346 Mich. 227. It is significant to note that the son, Floyd Anderson, contestant, was the recipient of a deed for an acre of land, upon which land his home was built in the year 1954, at which time he did not know the contents of his mother's will, and at a time when it was not convenient for him to allege her incompetency to make a deed.

  6. Fay v. Kohn

    90 N.W.2d 837 (Mich. 1958)

    " Among other cases of like import is In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366. Measured by the tests that have been repeatedly applied, it may not be said under the proofs in the instant case that Charles Fay, on July 26, 1955, lacked sufficient mental capacity to make a will.

  7. In re Calhoun Estate

    77 N.W.2d 790 (Mich. 1956)   Cited 6 times

    , See In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366 (followed in In re Thayer's Estate, 309 Mich. 473; In re Hallitt's Estate, 324 Mich. 654; In re Merrill's Estate, 326 Mich. 351; and In re Kenealy's Estate, 336 Mich. 657). "When no question of fraud or of undue influence is involved, but the question, is one solely of mental capacity, and the fact is shown that the testator wrote or dictated the will without being prompted, and the will itself is intelligible and consistent in its provisions, and disposes of all the testator's property, and there is nothing upon the face of it to indicate mental unsoundness, the testimony as to mental incapacity would have to be very strong and convincing to defeat such will.

  8. In re Heazle's Estate

    74 Idaho 72 (Idaho 1953)   Cited 12 times

    "In general the requisite is that the testator must at the time of making his will have sufficient mentality to enable him to know what property he possesses and of which he is making a testamentary disposition, to consider and know who are the natural objects of his bounty, and to understand what the disposition is that he is making of his property by his will." In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366, 13 N.W.2d 852, at page 855. Variously stating the general rule to the same effect, are the following: In re Larsen's Estate, 191 Wn. 257, 71 P.2d 47; Slater v. Phipps, 193 Okla. 267, 143 P.2d 133; In re Agnew's Estate, 65 Cal.App.2d 553, 151 P.2d 126; In re Getchell's Estate, 295 Mich. 681, 295 N.W. 360; In re Hayer's Estate, 230 Iowa 880, 299 N.W. 431; McLoughlin v. Sheehan, 250 Mass. 132, 145 N.E. 259; Morecraft v. Felgenhauer, 346 Ill. 415, 178 N.E. 877; Appeal of Martin, 133 Me. 422, 179 A. 655; Doyle v. Rody, 180 Md. 471, 25 A.2d 457; In re Ash's Estate, 351 Pa. 317, 41 A.2d 620; Wooddy v. Taylor, 114 Va. 737, 77 S.E. 498; Lindsey v. Stephens, 229 Mo. 600, 129 S.W. 641; Farmers Union Bank v. Johnson, 27 Tenn. App. 342,

  9. In re Kenealy's Estate

    59 N.W.2d 38 (Mich. 1953)   Cited 3 times

    The burden of proof rests at all times on the contestant to show by competent evidence that at the time of the execution of the will testator was mentally incompetent or under undue influence to make the will. In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366. The trial judge held that the contestant did not sustain such burden of proof and we are in accord with his ruling, notwithstanding minor incidents that would show that the testator was not as bright as he had been in earlier years. He had been successful in the plumbing business, from which he retired some 40 years prior to his death.

  10. In re Merrill's Estate

    40 N.W.2d 179 (Mich. 1949)   Cited 3 times

    " See, also, In re Johnson's Estate, 308 Mich. 366. In re Slepski's Estate, 253 Mich. 340, involved facts similar to those in the case at bar.