Skip to main content

White's Estate

Citations

  • 262 Pa. 356
  • 105 A. 549
  • 1918 Pa. LEXIS 651

Syllabus

<p>Wills — Contests—Alleged undue influence — Petition for issue d. v. n. — Refused — Executors — Insertion of name after execution— Proof of execution of will — Sufficiency—Presumption—Burden of proof.</p> <p>1. Although the proponent of a will is a near relative, and the chief beneficiary thereunder, the fact that he actively participated in the preparation and execution of the will does not, of itself, place upon him the burden of showing lack of undue influence, as it would in the case of a stranger.</p> <p>2. It is not essential to the validity of a will to prove more by the witnesses, who were present at its execution, than the identity of the instrument, that they saw the testator subscribe or make his mark, and that at the time of doing so he was of sound mind; since a will so executed is presumed valid although it is not read at the time.</p> <p>3. A will should not be set aside merely because of suspicious cir- . cumstances or some unusual features in the evidence for the proponent, especially where such evidence has been given credit by the court, who saw and heard the witnesses.</p> <p>4. The naming of an executor in a will after the execution thereof is ineffective, but does not destroy the instrument.</p> <p>5. A petition for an issue d. v. n. was properly refused where the testamentary capacity of the testator was admitted and where, although undue influence was alleged and it appeared that the proponent, who was the principal beneficiary, had caused the will to be prepared in testator’s absence and had assisted him in its execution, there was evidence that at the time of its execution, which was four years prior to his death, testator was of sound mind, that the testator several days after the .execution of the will read it aloud in the presence of a number of people, expressed full satisfaction with it, and that it remained in his possession until the time of his death, during which périod he made no effort to change it.</p>

Judges: Brown, Fox, Frazer, Moschzisker, Reargument, Simpson, Stewart, Walling

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.