Drury v. Moulton

Citations

• 70 Wash. 374
• 126 P. 912
• 1912 Wash. LEXIS 1058

Syllabus

<p>Wills — Contest—“Persons Interested.” Where the testatrix’s father, who would have inherited the estate if no will had been made, was so far insane as to be incapable of managing his own- affairs until his own death, his son as his heir may maintain a contest of the will, being a “person interested” in the will, within the meaning of the statute respecting a will contest.</p> <p>Wills — Mental Capacity — Evidence—Sueeiciency. A testatrix is not shown to have sufficient capacity to execute a will ten day's before she was declared insane, where prior to the execution, she had shown grave symptoms of the affliction, from the first she declined more or less rapidly, and ten days after the will was executed she was found unsafe to be at large, and was confined and finally died from the effects of her infirmity.</p> <p>Limitation oe Actions — Disabilities—Mental Capacity — Evidence — Sueeiciency—Wills-—Contest. There is no sufficient evidence of insanity or incapability of understanding one’s legal right so as to toll the statute of limitations, respecting the institution of a will contest, where it merely appears that a man, seventy years of age, retired from active business after meeting with an accident affecting one of his legs, which, with his corpulence, prevented his walking or getting around, and that he believed in spiritualism, and manifested deeply-felt religion by Bible reading, prayer, and singing; while other evidence showed that he retained control of his affairs and had no infirmity of mind.</p> <p>Descent and Distribution — Heirs — Presumption — Death and Divorce — Wills—Contest—Burden oe Proving Heirship. Where a testatrix, dying without issue, had separated from her husband three years before her death, her next of bin, in order to contest the will, must show that the husband was dead or divorced at the time of her death; there being no presumption from the lapse of such period of time.</p>