Estate of Watlack, Matter of
| Decision Date | 28 October 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 15319-3-III,15319-3-III |
| Citation | 88 Wn.App. 603,945 P.2d 1154 |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
| Parties | In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Stephen WATLACK. Dorothy SANFORD, Audrey Watlack, Robert Watlack, Hubert Watlack, and Richard Watlack, Appellants, v. Dawn FREEMAN and David Watlack, Respondents. |
Albert J. Golden, Golden & Knowlton, Walla Walla, for Respondents.
Between March 26, 1988, and June 22, 1988, Stephen Watlack executed two wills. The first will named his children as beneficiaries and the second will disinherited them in favor of the children of his favorite brother. The trial court set aside the second will as the product of an insane delusion and admitted the first will to probate. The personal representative and beneficiaries of the second will appeal. We hold that the facts support the trial court's conclusion that Mr. Watlack was suffering from an insane delusion at the time he executed the second will.
Stephen Watlack was born on August 3, 1902. He was This dispute led to litigation between Mr. Watlack and Ms. Gregory and Mr. Scott. The parties negotiated a settlement wherein Mr. Watlack received his home in Falbrook, California, and a 1983 Lincoln automobile. As part of the settlement, he agreed to release all of his claims against Ms. Gregory and Mr. Scott and to drop criminal charges. At this time, it was also determined that Mr. Watlack would sell his home and return to Starbuck, Washington, to live with his daughter.
divorced in 1963, and thereafter maintained only sporadic contact with his two children David Watlack and Dawn Freeman. In March 1988, Dawn Freeman went to California to assist her father in a dispute he was involved in with his long-time companion, Dorothy Gregory. This dispute arose over the disappearance of approximately $100,000 of cash, which Mr. Watlack believed Ms. Gregory's nephew, Gordon Scott, had taken. At the same time, Mr. Watlack had a delusion that Mr. Scott had hit him over the head. Mr. Watlack made an attempt to attack Mr. Scott with an ax as a result of this delusion.
On March 26, 1988, Mr. Watlack executed a will while still a resident of California, designating his two children as the sole beneficiaries. A prior will designated Ms. Gregory as the beneficiary.
In April 1988, prior to returning to Starbuck, Washington, Mr. Watlack transferred ownership of his 1983 Lincoln to Dawn Freeman and placed his home in California for sale. He opened a joint checking account in Dayton, Washington, with Ms. Freeman. In May 1988, he gave Ms. Freeman $200 to purchase clothes for herself and her children. He subsequently accused her of stealing the $200.
At this time, he was constantly talking about what he would do with the proceeds from the sale of his house. His house sold and a check for $98,000 was issued on May 31, 1988. When Mr. Watlack inquired about this money, Ms. Freeman told him she had not yet received it. Ms. Freeman had in fact arranged for the check to be held in California. She did not intend to permanently deprive or Mr. Watlack moved from the Freeman home in the latter part of May 1988. At that time, he was angry with Ms. Freeman. He accused her of being a thief, and stated he wanted to return to the sea. Thereafter, he lived in a motel for a few days, and then lived in a foster home run by Mr. and Mrs. Sanford until he was placed in a nursing home in Walla Walla in September 1989. Ms. Freeman and her husband attempted to visit Mr. Watlack at the foster home on May 29, 1988, but he became extremely angry and accused them of stealing his money. The Sanfords requested that they not return as it was too upsetting.
misappropriate Mr. Watlack's funds, but was fearful that if the check came in the mail, he would cash it, leave, and dissipate the funds. At no point, did Mr. Watlack authorize Ms. Freeman to take control of the proceeds of his house sale.
Ms. Freeman returned from a trip to California on June 17, 1988, and promptly turned the sale proceeds check over to Dayton attorney Terry Nealey. Initially, she had contacted Mr. Nealey on May 5 about a real estate matter concerning Mr. Watlack and thereafter on May 25, to inquire about a guardianship for him. She was concerned about his desire to take his money and return to the sea, and his desire to obtain revenge against Mr. Scott. She was also concerned that someone would take his money. At that time, Mr. Nealey agreed to represent her with respect to the guardianship for her father.
In the meantime, on June 15, 1988, Mr. Watlack asked Mrs. Sanford to make an appointment for him with an attorney. He wanted to change his will. Acquainted with Mr. Nealey, she scheduled an appointment for June 17. During this meeting, Mr. Watlack identified his family members, including his children and niece and nephews, and named the niece and nephews as the sole beneficiaries because they were the children of his favorite brother. None of these relatives visited him in Washington or came to his funeral. One of them, Audrey Watlack, visited him in California in April 1988, when he had his dispute with On June 21, 1988, Ms. Freeman and her husband met with Mr. Nealey to discuss Mr. Watlack's guardianship. At this time, Ms. Freeman turned over the check for $98,000 and the bank account cashier's check for $1,500. Later that day, Mr. Watlack returned to Mr. Nealey's office to sign his will. Mr. Nealey then disclosed to Mr. Watlack that Ms. Freeman had delivered to him the $98,000 check, and a cashier's check for $1,500 from his bank account. He also advised Mr. Watlack of the guardianship petition. Mr. Watlack agreed to the guardianship so long as Mrs. Sanford was appointed as his guardian. Mr. Watlack requested that the check for $98,000 be placed into an interest bearing account.
Ms. Gregory. At the time of his meeting with Mr. Nealey, Mr. Watlack stated that he did not want to leave his son and daughter anything. He expressed his anger with Ms. Freeman and again accused her of stealing money from him. The provision in the will disinheriting Mr. Watlack's children stated that they were to receive nothing because he had spent very little time with them and had previously given Ms. Freeman his 1983 Lincoln.
The next day Mr. Watlack returned to Mr. Nealey's office to sign his new will. Angry and pounding the desk, Mr. Watlack again accused his children of stealing the money now in Mr. Nealey's possession. Concerned about his capacity to make a will, Mr. Nealey tried to calm his client. Although agitated, Mr. Watlack had testamentary capacity at the time of the signing of the June 22, 1988, will. Nonetheless, on that date he still held the false belief that Ms. Freeman had stolen money from him and continued to accuse her of taking the money. From at least March 1988 through the date of his eventual death, Mr. Watlack suffered from this and other insane delusions.
The guardianship was commenced in superior court on June 22, 1988. The guardian permitted Mr. Watlack to maintain a checking account until September 1989, to which his pension was deposited and personal expenses Mr. Watlack died on December 16, 1993, in Walla Walla. Ms. Freeman petitioned the court to admit his will dated March 26, 1988, and Audrey Watlack, Mr. Watlack's niece, filed an objection and petitioned the court to admit his will dated June 22, 1988. After a trial, the court made all of the findings recited in this summary of the facts. Based on these findings, the court determined Mr. Watlack had suffered from an insane delusion at the time he executed the June 22, 1988, will and made the following conclusions:
including foster home charges, were deducted. Mr. Watlack had a habit of stashing cash and this behavior continued while he lived in Washington. Out of money from his checking account, he accumulated more than $2,000 hidden under his mattress that was discovered when he went to a nursing home in Walla Walla in September 1989.
4. Watlack had no rational basis to believe that Dawn Freeman had stolen the house proceeds.
5. Watlack was suffering from an insane delusion at the time he executed the June 22, 1988 will.
6. As of the afternoon of June 21, 1988, there was no rational basis for Watlack to believe that Dawn Freeman had stolen the house proceeds. The evidence was overwhelming to the contrary. The evidence did not change between June 21 and the date the will was executed on June 22, 1988. There was no rational basis for Watlack to believe Dawn Freeman had stolen other monies from him either. On June 22 Watlack had testamentary capacity.
7. Watlack had not put aside his insane delusions when he made the will on June 22, 1988.
8. Dawn Freeman and David Watlack were disinherited based upon Watlack's extreme anger caused by insane delusion and not on the basis that Watlack had taken care of Mrs. Freeman by a lifetime gift or that he had little contact with Dawn Freeman and David Watlack.
The court admitted to probate the March 26, 1988, will
designating Mr. Watlack's children as the sole beneficiaries. Dorothy Sanford, as the personal representative of the will dated June 22, 1988, and Mr. Watlack's niece and nephews appealed.
Mr. Watlack's children contend this appeal should be dismissed because the appellants did not file a report of proceedings, citing Heilman v. Wentworth, 18 Wash.App. 751, 571 P.2d 963 (1977), review denied, 90 Wash.2d 1004 (1978) and City of Seattle v. Torkar, 25 Wash.App. 476, 610 P.2d 379, review denied, 94 Wash.2d 1001 (1980). These cases are distinguishable because they involved incomplete records that were insufficient for adequate review by the appellate court. Here, appellants are not asserting any factual challenges, but are challenging whether the conclusions are supported by the court's findings. RAP 9.1(a) provides that the record on review may consist of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Estate of Black
... 102 P.3d 796 153 Wash.2d 152 In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Margaret BLACK, Deceased ... Douglas William Carlton, Richard D. Burns, Lorna Bemis, and The First Christian Church of Dayton, ... Based on the holdings in In re Estate of Jolly, 3 Wash.2d 615, 101 P.2d 995 (1940), and In re Estate of Watlack", 88 Wash.App. 603, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997), we find that the court abused its discretion by awarding attorney fees to Burns only ... \xC2" ... ...
-
Wright v. Dave Johnson Ins. Inc.
... ... In re Estate of Watlack, 88 Wash.App. 603, 610, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997). Although constructive trusts are most ... We disagree. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action ... It is ... ...
-
Johannes v. Johannes, No. 35504-3-II (Wash. App. 4/22/2008)
... Unpublished Opinion ... ESTATE OF EVELYN C. JOHANNES, GERALD JOHANNES, Personal Representative, Respondent, ... JAMES JOHANNES, ... happened to these Estate funds, based on the same facts before the trial court, we hold as a matter of law that Gerald's inability to account for these assets constituted a breach of his fiduciary ... App. 476, 491, 66 P.3d 670 (citing In re Estate of Watlack", 88 Wn. App. 603, 612, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997)), review denied, 150 Wn.2d 1020 (2003). 34 ... \xC2" ... ...
-
In re Estate of Black
... ... The court merely determines whether any disputed material fact exists and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Hudesman v. Foley, 73 Wash.2d 880, 886-87, 441 P.2d 532 (1968) ... Here, the record strongly suggests that the court ... In re Estate of Watlack, 88 Wash.App. 603, 612, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997) ... Where both sides advance reasonable and good faith arguments in support of their respective ... ...
-
Chapter a. testamentary capacity
...and convincing evidence exists when the ultimate fact in issue is shown by the evidence to be highly probable." In re Estate ofWatlack, 88 Wn.App. 603, 610, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997); see also In re Melter, 167 Wn.App. 285, 301, 273 P.3d 991, 1000 (2012). 100 Dean v. Jordan, 194 Wash. 661, 669, ......
-
Chapter 26
...432, 243 P.2d 1044 (1952): 12.8(1) Wash. Fed. Sav. v. Klein, 177 Wn.App. 22, 311 P.3d 53 (2013): 12.2(2)(a) Watlack, In re Estate of, 88 Wn.App. 603, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997): 13.1(a), 13.1(c), 13.3(2)(b), 13.9(2)(a) Wegley's Estate, In re, 65 Wn.2d 689, 399 P.2d 326 (1965): 3.3(1)(c), 10.5(1)(......
-
Chapter 13.3 Will Contests
...518 (1947); Estate of Kvande v. Olsen, 74 Wn.App. 65, 70-72, 871 P.2d 669, review denied, 124 Wn.2d 1021 (1994); In re Estate of Watlack, 88 Wn.App. 603, 612, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997). However, the personal representative or executor under a will not yet admitted to probate lacks standing to ch......
-
Chapter a. establishing the will
...to reimbursement for expenses of doing so.156 The amount of the award is within the court's discretion.157 In In re Estate of Watlack, 88 Wn.App. 603, 945 P.2d 1154 (1997), the court awarded costs and attorney fees from the estate to the personal representatives of both of two competing [Pa......