Buford v. Gruber

• Decision Date: 23 November 1909
• Parties: BUFORD v. GRUBER et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

122 S.W. 717

223 Mo. 231

BUFORD v. GRUBER et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

November 23, 1909.

1. WILLS (§ 38) — COMPETENCY OF TESTATOR — "INSANE DELUSION" — "DELUSION."

Where a person imagines something extravagant to exist which really has no existence, and he is incapable of being reasoned out of his false belief, he is in that respect insane, and if his "delusion" relates to his child, and he imagines that the child is not his, when there is no foundation for such conception, and is incapable of being reasoned out of the same, he is possessed of an "insane delusion" as to his child, and, if his will is found to be the fruit of such false conception and disinherits the child, the jury may find against the paper writing purporting to be the will, though it may develop that he was rational on other subjects and capable of transacting ordinary business (quoting Words and Phrases, vol. 2, p. 1971 et seq.).

2. WILLS (§ 400) — REVIEW — QUESTIONS OF FACT.

An action to contest a will on the ground of the insanity of the testator is an action at law within the rule that, where the evidence is conflicting, the Supreme Court will not undertake to reconcile it.

3. WILLS (§ 400) — REVIEW — EVIDENCE.

Where, in an action by a disinherited child to contest the parent's will on the ground of insanity, there was competent evidence of the insanity of testator, in that he possessed an insane delusion that his child was not his, and that the will was the fruit of such delusion, the Supreme Court would not disturb the verdict by undertaking to say that the jury placed an improper estimate on the weight of evidence.

4. WILLS (§ 53) — CONTESTS — INSANITY — EVIDENCE — ADMISSIBILITY.

In an action to contest a will on the ground of the insanity of testator, in that he possessed an insane delusion that a disinherited child was not his child, evidence of the condition of testator's mind long prior to and closely approaching the time of the execution of the will, and of the condition of his mind shortly subsequent to the execution of the will, is admissible to indicate whether testator, when the will was executed, had sufficient capacity.

5. WILLS (§ 55) — CONTESTS — INSANITY — EVIDENCE — SUFFICIENCY.

In an action by a disinherited daughter to contest her father's will on the ground of insanity of the father, in that he had an insane delusion that she was not his child, evidence held to justify a finding that his false belief amounted to monomania, or an insane delusion.

6. WILLS (§ 52) — CONTESTS — INSANITY — PRESUMPTIONS.

Where the insanity of testator is the result of a temporary cause, there is no presumption of continuity; but, where an insane condition of mind exhibiting its peculiarities for a long period of years is shown, continued insanity will be presumed, and the burden of establishing a subsequent lucid interval at the time of the execution of a will is on him who asserts it.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lafayette County; Samuel Davis, Judge.

Action by Elizabeth E. Buford against Robert Gustav Gruber and others to contest the will of Gustav Gruber, deceased. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

This action was instituted by respondent, Elizabeth E. Buford, against Robert Gustav Gruber and Casper William Gruber, minors, and Walter B. Waddell and John Chamberlain, executors, having as its purpose the contest of the last will and testament of Gustav Gruber, the father of Elizabeth E. Buford, Robert Gustav Gruber, and Casper William Gruber.

It is charged in the petition filed by respondent that Gustav Gruber, on the 14th day of October, 1903, in form did sign a paper writing purporting to be his last will and testament, by which he gave to respondent, Elizabeth E. Buford, his daughter, $1, and to his two minor sons, Robert Gustav Gruber and Casper William Gruber, all the remainder of his estate. It was further alleged: That at the time of making his will Gruber was, and for a long time prior thereto had been, afflicted with dipsomania, which had destroyed his mind and memory; that he was subject to and labored under the insane delusion that his daughter, the respondent, was not his child; and that his wife was unfaithful to her marriage vow. It is further alleged that the will in question was not executed by Gruber in sound mind and disposing memory, but that at the time of its execution, and for a long time prior thereto, he was mentally incapable of making same and was devoid of testamentary capacity on account of said disease and said insane delusion, which insane delusion operated upon and controlled his mind and induced him to sign said paper, and thereby to attempt to disinherit the respondent. On the issue presented by the pleadings, two trials were had. At both trials a jury found the paper writing proposed not to be the last will of Gustav Gruber. The first verdict was set aside by the learned trial judge because it was against the weight of the evidence, and the controlling question now before this court is whether the second verdict can be sustained.

As demonstrated by the instructions given, the only question submitted to the jury was whether or not, at the time of the execution of the will in question, Gruber, the testator, was laboring under the insane delusion that his daughter was not his child, and that his disinheritance of her was the result solely of such delusion. Proponents having interposed proper demurrers at the close of respondent's evidence, as well as at the close of all the evidence, and having saved proper exceptions to the action of the court in overruling said demurrers, it devolves upon this court to critically examine the evidence with a view of determining whether or not either of such demurrers should have been sustained. This will involve an extended statement of the facts.

Gustav Gruber married Mary M. Boulware, at Lexington, Mo., some time in 1880. Their married life was spent at that place. Gruber was in the insurance business and was quite successful. At the time of his death, his property amounted in value to about $15,000. In 1884 the respondent, Elizabeth E. Buford (née Gruber), was born. Casper William Gruber, one of the proponents, was born in 1888, and the other proponent, Robert Gustav Gruber, was born in 1895. Mrs. Gruber died in March, 1901. Up to about the year 1899 the relations of Mr. Gruber's family had been happy. He was prosperous and was affectionately devoted to his wife and children. To the respondent, his daughter, who was known as and called "Bessie" (and who will be so termed hereafter), he was especially devoted, and as between her and his two young boys he was partial to Bessie. Mrs. Gruber was an exemplary lady and had the respect and esteem of all their acquaintances as a refined and virtuous woman and an affectionate wife and mother; but testator had formed the habit of drinking intoxicating liquor, and some time during the year 1899 the habit had developed to such an extent that he became intoxicated nearly every day. At this time, and continuing up to the time of the death of Mrs. Gruber in March, 1901, he invariably returned home in the evening in an intoxicated state. The drinking habit evidently increased, and he reached the point where, when he returned home in the evening, he acted like a maniac, cursed, swore, whooped, yelled, tried to imitate the voices of beasts, and, as the testimony shows, formed, without a reason, an intense aversion to his wife and his daughter Bessie. About 18 months or two years before Mrs. Gruber died, he became impressed with the notion that his wife had been untrue to him, and that Bessie was not his child. This notion gradually formed in his mind as a fixed conviction, which his wife and others were unable to reason away. In the presence of his wife, he would tell Bessie that she was not his child, and he would tell his wife that Bessie was not his daughter. He would make these charges both when he was drunk and when he was sober, in the morning, at noon, and in the evening, and continued to do so almost daily up to the time of Mrs. Gruber's death. When Mrs. Gruber protested and remonstrated with him and tried to reason him out of his unfounded delusion, he became very much excited, flew into a passion, raved, and uttered oaths and imprecations. There is no question, and it is conceded, that Mrs. Gruber was a virtuous lady and a loyal, devoted, and dutiful wife. It is further conceded that Bessie was his daughter, and that there was no reason or foundation for the belief or delusion that she was not. Mr. Gruber's habits of drinking and his intense aversion to Bessie continued to increase up to the time of the death of Mrs. Gruber. In the meantime Gruber was attending to his business, which he continued to manage fairly well, although it fell off considerably on account of his intemperate habits. He kept bank and other accounts correctly. In short, the evidence shows that he continued to conduct his insurance business, but not with the same push and success as he had prior thereto.

Mrs. Gruber died early in the evening. Gruber had been gone that day, as usual, to his office. He came home shortly before her death. The scene that occurred at the deathbed beggars description. He would not believe that she was dying, but insisted that she was hungry and forced potted ham into her mouth. After her death, a few moments later, he poured raw whisky into her mouth, claiming that she was not dead, and that he possessed the hypnotic power to restore her to health. When the neighbor ladies who were presented protested, he threatened to throw them out and became almost violent. After the death of Mrs. Gruber, Bessie, who was then 17 years old, took charge as Mr. Gruber's housekeeper and assumed the motherhood of her two little brothers. She was fondly devoted to them both, and especially Robert, who was then only about 6 years old. She did all the cooking, mending, sewing, and...