Gower

Gower v. Winelander

Good Law
103 Cal. App. 3d 384·163 Cal. Rptr. 70·1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1583
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 18, 1980Civ. No. 47218California2,863 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grodin, J.

This case requires us to determine whether a subscribing witness to a will who is named in the will as a beneficiary becomes “disinterested” within the meaning of Probate Code section 51 by filing a disclaimer of her interest after the testatrix’ death. While our own policy preferences tempt us to an affirmative answer, we feel constrained by existing law to hold that a disclaimer is ineffective for that purpose.

I

Geneve Parsons executed her will on May 3, 1976. Three persons signed the will as attesting witnesses: Evelyn Nielson, respondent Marie Gower, and Bob Warda, a notary public. Two of the witnesses, Nielson and Gower, were named in the will as beneficiaries. Nielson was given $100; Gower was given certain real property. Mrs. Parsons died on De *387 cember 13, 1976, and her will was admitted to probate on the petition of her executors, respondents Gower and Lenice Haymond. On September 12, 1977, Nielson filed a disclaimer of her $100 bequest. 1 Appellants then claimed an interest in the estate on the ground that the devise to Gower was invalid. 2 The trial court rejected their argument, which is now the sole contention on appeal.

Appellants base their claim on…

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.