From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Fuston

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 17, 1997
936 P.2d 365 (Or. Ct. App. 1997)

Opinion

PR 90-129A; CA A79788

Argued and submitted November 13, 1996.

Affirmed March 19, petition for review denied June 17, 1997 ( 325 Or. 438).

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Umatilla County, J.F. Olsen, Judge.

Harold A. Fabre argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellants.

Brant M. Medonich argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Landau and Armstrong, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


In this will contest, the issues are whether the decedent had testamentary capacity when he executed a will that left his entire estate to proponent and whether the will was the result of undue influence. The trial court upheld the will. We review de novo. ORS 19.125(3).

The legal principles involved are well established and do not require discussion. We have carefully reviewed the testimony and the exhibits, giving weight where appropriate to the trial court's opportunity to evaluate the witnesses' testimony at first hand. We conclude that the decedent had testamentary capacity and that, even if there was an attempt to exercise undue influence over him, that attempt had nothing to do with his decision to leave his estate to proponent. The will was solely the product of decedent's desires, not of anyone else's efforts.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

King v. Fuston

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 17, 1997
936 P.2d 365 (Or. Ct. App. 1997)
Case details for

King v. Fuston

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Estate of Chester Fuston, Deceased. Nellie KING and…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 17, 1997

Citations

936 P.2d 365 (Or. Ct. App. 1997)
936 P.2d 365

Citing Cases

Harris v. Jourdan

ORS 111.105 was enacted in 1969 and was subsequently amended in 1979 (like many other statutes) to eliminate…