Skip to main content
· 10/15/1884

Jackson v. Hardin

Citations

  • 83 Mo. 175

Syllabus

<p>1. Will, Capacity to Make. One who is capable of comprehending ■ all his property and all the persons who reasonably come within the range of his bounty, and who has sufficient intelligence to understand his ordinary business and to know what disposition he is making of his property, has sufficient capacity to make a will.</p> <p>2. --. One may he capable of making a will, and yet be incapable of making a contract or managing bis estate.</p> <p>3. Will, Contest concerning: presumption: burden oe prooe. The law presumes that a testator was possessed of a sound and disposing mind, and it rests upon him who disputes the validity of the will to overcome this presumption by persuasive evidence.</p> <p>4. WiH, Determining Validity of: duty oe court and jury. In determining the validity of a will it is unsafe for courts and juries to look to its equities, lest they fall into the greater mischief of making wills for other people.</p> <p>5. Will: undue influence. The influence exerted upon a testator winch would be sufficient to invalidate his will must be such as amounts to over-persuasion, coercion or force, destroying his free agency or will-power, and not merely the influence of affection or attachment, or the desire of gratifying the wishes of one beloved, respected and trusted by the testator.</p> <p>6. The testator in this case .held to have been possessed of a sound and disposing mind, and free from undue influence in making his will.</p> <p>7. Practice: province oe jury -. duty oe court to direct a verdict. Where there are facts established from which the jury may reasonably draw legitimate inferences tending to sustain an issue, the court should not interfere. But, where the evidence is such that it would be the plain duty of the trial judge to set aside the verdict as unsupported by the evidence, it is his duty and prerogative to interfere before submission, and direct a verdict for defendant.</p> <p>3. Pleading: practice : evidence. In an action contesting the

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • reviewing trial court’s failure to make sufficient findings and rulings under unsustainable exercise of discretion standard
  • superior, court not required to rule on parties’ requests for findings and rulings as long as decision sufficiently recites basis for decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Philips

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.