Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

testimonywill
will

Related Cases

State Of New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services v. M.W.C., Not Reported in A.2d, 2006 WL 488630
View Case »
Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass’n v. Baker, 492 N.W.2d 695
View Case »
McDaniel v. McDaniel, 288 Ga. 711, 707 S.E.2d 60, 11 FCDR 542
View Case »
Armstrong v. Armstrong, 618 So.2d 1278
View Case »
In re Estate of Fairbairn, 46 A.D.3d 973, 846 N.Y.S.2d 779, 2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 09644
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

In re Demaris’ Estate, 166 Or. 36, 110 P.2d 571

Facts

George Demaris, a 39-year-old bachelor, died on April 11, 1939, leaving an estate valued at $7,347.57. His will, which named his sister Ida Fuller as the sole beneficiary, was contested by his father Amos Demaris, who died during the proceedings, leading to Arch Demaris taking over as the contestant. The contest was based on allegations of improper execution and undue influence, although the latter was largely abandoned. The circuit court found that George was not under duress or improper influence when he executed the will.

George Demaris, a bachelor, 39 years of age, died in Milton, Umatilla County, April 11, 1939, leaving an estate which was appraised as worth $7,347.57. The contested instrument made the deceased's sister, Ida Fuller, sole beneficiary.

Issue

The main legal issues were whether George Demaris knew the contents of the will and the identity of the witnesses, and whether the witnesses signed the will in the presence of the testator as required by law.

The only issues, therefore, are: did the testator know (1) the contents of the instrument, and (2) the identity of the attesters; and did the attesting witnesses sign 'in the presence of the testator' within the contemplation of § 18-201, O.C.L.A.

Rule

According to § 18-201, O.C.L.A., a will must be in writing, signed by the testator or by another person under his direction, in his presence, and attested by two or more competent witnesses subscribing their names in the presence of the testator.

Every will shall be in writing, signed by the testator, or by some other person under his direction, in his presence, and shall be attested by two or more competent witnesses, subscribing their names to the will, in the presence of the testator.

Analysis

The court analyzed the evidence presented, focusing on the circumstances surrounding the execution of the will. It found that George Demaris was aware of the contents of the will and that the witnesses signed it in a manner consistent with the legal requirements. The court noted that the testimony of Dr. Gillis and his wife, who witnessed the signing, was credible and supported by the findings of fact.

The findings of fact of the circuit court state: 'At the time of the execution of said will George Demaris was not acting under duress, fraud or undue influence.' We have carefully read the transcript of evidence and are fully satisfied that there was no room for any other finding.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the validity of the will, concluding that it was executed properly and that George Demaris was not under any undue influence at the time of its signing.

The findings of fact of the circuit court state: 'Dr. Gillis, after receiving the instructions to prepare the will from the testator, went to his own office and there prepared the last will and testament which is in controversy.'

Who won?

Ida Fuller prevailed in the case as the court upheld the validity of the will, finding that George Demaris executed it voluntarily and with a clear mind.

Ida Fuller is the proponent and Arch Demaris is the contestant.

You must be