Herster v. Herster

Citations

• 116 Pa. 612
• 11 A. 410
• 1887 Pa. LEXIS 429

Syllabus

<p>1. On the trial of an issue devisavit vel non, the trial judge is justified in directing a verdict in favor of the lDroxsonent — not when he may feel that if he were sitting as a juror he would regard the evidence as insufficient to induce him to find a verdict against the alleged will — but when, after a careful review of all the testimony, he would feel that if a verdict were rendered in favor of the proponents after a fair and impartial trial, he would be constrained to set it aside as contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.</p> <p>2. When, the principal devisee and the testator dwelling together, a confidential relation exists between them, so that undue influence secretly exercised is especially possible, direct and positive evidence thereof is not essentially necessary; but, whether direct or circumstantial, the evidence must be of a satisfactory and convincing character.</p> <p>8. Declarations of the testator made after the execution of the will, but tending to show the relations between the testator and the principal ' devisee and the power of the latter over the former, and indicating that undue influence or improper control of the free agency of the testator had been exercised, are admissible.</p>