Estate of Keegan

The will of Michael Keegan, deceased, having been regularly admitted to probate, it was afterwards contested by Mary Monihen and others, upon the grounds,— 1. That at the time of the making of the will the deceased was not of sound mind; and 2. That it was procured by the undue influence of one of the proponents—John Kane. There was another ground, of “fraud and misrepresentation,” which was, however, abandoned. The two issues were submitted to a jury, who found adversely to contestants upon both of them. Contestants made a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and from the order denying the new trial they appeal.

The main contention of appellants is, that the evidence was insufficient to justify.the verdict, but, waiving respondents’ point of want of proper specification, this contention is not maintainable. Where, in a contest brought to upset a will, the verdict upholds the will, and the trial judge refuses to grant a new trial, this court will not disturb the verdict unless the evidence be almost overwhelmingly in favor of appellants. This is certainly not the case here. We do not deem it necessary to state the evidence. It is sufficient to say that there is no foundation…