Estate of Ehle

Barber v. Boatright

Good Law
115 Cal. App. 656·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 757·2 P.2d 398
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 27, 1931Docket No. 4389.California2,777 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Jamison, J.

On November 2, 1928, Mary B. Ehle made an olographic will as follows:

Contestants, who are nieces and nephews and the heirs at law of testatrix,. filed a contest against the probate of said will, alleging therein as grounds for said contest: 1. Testamentary incapacity; 2. Undue influence of Phoebe Boatright; 3. Deceit and fraud of Phoebe Boatright.

The proponent answered denying the alleged grounds of contest and the issues thus formed were submitted to a jury, which returned a verdict in favor of contestants upon all of said alleged grounds. Appellant moved for a new trial 'and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which motions were denied. Prom the order denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict' and from the judgment proponent prosecutes this appeal.

The facts surrounding the execution of this will are substantially as follows: The testatrix, at the date of the execution of this will, was ninety-one years of age and was feeble in mind and body. Dr. Hiram Ehle was her only child and for many years had provided for her care and support. He was a practicing physician of Susanville, California, and was sixty-eight years of age at the date of his death,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.