capacity and contests - testamentary capacity

Question 1

via the rst, what does it mean to have testamentary capacity

Answer 1

must be capable of knowing and understanding in a general way:

1 the nature and extent of his or her property (ie knowing in a general way your property)

2, the natural objects of his or her bounty and (who would someone in your position typically give your property to?)

3. the disposition that he or she is making of that property, and must also be capable of (ie understand wit it is you’re doing)
4. relating these elements to one another and forming an orderly desire regarding the disposition of the property

Question 2

what kind of knowlege is needed for testamentary capaacity

Answer 2

doesn’t need to be actual knowlege; just need to be CAPABLE of knowing these three

Question 3

testator executed a will but several witnesses testified saying they didn’t think he was of sound mind

Notary
Testified that she believed at the time he executed the will that he was of unsound mind

James, a witness to the will
In his opinion the testator had not been of sound mind for some years prior to the execution of the will

GW, a witness to the will
Just thought he was of unsound mind but could not elaborate why

Brem He once gave her a fish soaked in kerosene

Daisy – cousin not named in the will
Said he drank and was drunk most of the time; he had ran out of his house naked on numerous occasions

Marjorie
Thought he acted funny and queer

Harriet

Said he would hold his breath and appear to be dead

Are the testimonies of the witnesses enough to support a finding that the testator was not in his right mind at the time of the will execution.

Answer 3

What do his oddities have to do with his capacity to make a will?

Just because you’re odd doesn’t mean you can’t think rationally

You must think about the RELEVANCE of it to the will execution

Testamentary capacity cannot be destroyed by showing a few isolated acts that are departures from the norm unless they DIRECTLY BEAR UPON AND HAVE INFLUENCED THE TESTAMENTARY ACT

Question 4

what is the presumption about capacity? how is it best rebutted

Answer 4

we start with the presumption of capacity
Contester has burden to prove otherwise The best way to rebut this presumption is via evidence of some medical type

Question 5

Why do we presume capacity?

Answer 5

Its based on the likelihood of the right outcome – incapacity is the

Question 6

key takeaway from wilson v lane

Presented testimony that she had an irrational fear of flooding in her house, that she had trouble dressing and bathing herself, and that she unnecessarily called the fire department to report a non existent fire

Introduced evidence of a guardianship petition
Ie proof that she could not handle business on her own
Also evidence that Dr said she had dementia

Was there sufficient evidence to show decent was not of sound mind

Answer 6

nope! even tho it was better than the writght case, it goes to show how far the presumption of capicty goes and how much a contestant needs to show to rebut it

Question 7

what about the timing of lack of capcity is important

Answer 7

The evidence must be relevant to TIME OF EXECUTION OF THE WILL
Just because you lack capacity AFTER execution doesn’t mean you lacked it at the time of execution

Question 8

whehter you have testamenatry capcity is all or nothing – either you have it or you dont – what compentiy issue is not like that

Answer 8

insane delusions

Question 9

what are insane delusions

Answer 9

the testator is stuck on a particualr idea, and its one to which the testator adherers against all evince and reason to the contrary

You lack rationality with respect to an ISOLATED ISSUE

Question 10

what happens if there is any evidence to support the testor’s delusion

Answer 10

the delusion is NOT insane

Question 11

what makes a delusion insane

Answer 11

When the person holding the delusion can’t be convinced otherwise
A delusion is a mistake but if they adhere to the mistake DESPITE evidence = its insane

Question 12

mistake v insane delusion

Answer 12

A mistake is susceptible to correction if the testator is told the truth
Courts do no reform or invalidate wills because of mistake but they do invalidate wills or provisions thereof resulting from an insane delusion

Question 13

how does a contestant prevail in an insane delusion assertion

Answer 13

the contestant must show both that the testator labored under an insane delusion and that the will or some part thereof was a product of the insane delusion

Question 14

stritmater (prob not the best application of ID doctrine; the man hater case)

The decedent, according to an expert witness, suffered from a split personality

She had a morbid aversion to men
However in her dealings with her lawyer and her bank she was reasonable and normal
In 1925 decadent became a member of the NJ branch of the national women’s party
During this period she spoke of leaving her estate to the party
She executed her will carrying out this intention and a month later she died

Whether decedent’s will is the product of her insanity

Answer 14

court says she suffered from an ID that affected her estate plan

An ID is PROVABLE one way or the other; here, this is a belief (men are terrible) its not provable one way or the other
The court is fighting against her wish to give to her cause and trying to find a doctrine to reach that result

The court’s own biases coming in; they are second guessing her intent

Question 15

what is the first step in an ID analysis

Answer 15

you must identify what the ID is
What is the mistaken belief of reality that persists despite evidence to the contrary?

Question 16

breeden (car crash/thoight his fam was out to get him)

The decedent had previously executed a formal will in 1991 and a holographic codicil leaving his estate to people other than sydney

The decedent died in his home from a self inflicted gunshot wound two days after he was involved in a highly publicized hit and run accident that killed the driver of the other car
When the police got to his home they discovered on his desk a handwritten document that read: I want everything to go to Sydney stone
At the bottom of the document he printed his name and signed beneath it

despite alchol in system, because he could write, id specific property and put in holographic will – he has gen capacitu

but did he suffer an ID (Thought his fam was out to get him so because of this he excluded them from holographic will)

Answer 16

we start with the presumption of no ID, which carries you a long way

Here he though his family was out to get him so he didn’t leave anything to them based on that insane delusion
Despite this, court finds that there is an explnation
He didn’t have a good relationship with his fam in areas that had nothing to do with the insane delusion, despite them being his immediate family
In an earlier will, he didnt involve his father and sister ( ie was of sound mind)

Question 17

what is the majority rule for insane delusions

ie how does it answer

1. is the delusion insane and
2. did the delusion case the bequest?

Answer 17

A delusion is insane only if there is no factual basis for the decedent’s erroneous belief.

A delusion caused a bequest if the delusion materially affected or influenced the decedent’s decision.

Question 18

what is the minority rule for insane delusions

ie how does it answer

1. is the delusion insane and
2. did the delusion case the bequest?

Answer 18

A delusion is insane if a rationale person could not have drawn the same conclusion as the decedent, even if there is some factual basis.

A delusion is presumed to have caused a bequest if there is delusion is insane and the bequest results in an unnatural disposition.

Question 19

make a flow chart for insane delusion