Hardenburgh v. Hardenburgh

• Decision Date: 11 December 1906
• Citation: Hardenburgh v. Hardenburgh, 133 Iowa 1, 109 N.W. 1014 (Iowa 1906)
• Parties: ASA HARDENBURGH, MYRTLE RUTH HARDENBURGH, AND MARY ALICE HARDENBURGH, proponents of the alleged last will and testament of THOMAS HARDENBURGH, deceased, v. WELLER HARDENBURGH, MARY RAHM, GEORGIANA DEAN, ALICE H. PHELPS AND ADA LANCASTER, contestants, Appellants
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

109 N.W. 1014

133 Iowa 1

ASA HARDENBURGH, MYRTLE RUTH HARDENBURGH, AND MARY ALICE HARDENBURGH, proponents of the alleged last will and testament of THOMAS HARDENBURGH, deceased, v. WELLER HARDENBURGH, MARY RAHM, GEORGIANA DEAN, ALICE H. PHELPS AND ADA LANCASTER, contestants, Appellants

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

December 11, 1906

Appeal from Cass District Court.-- HON O. D. WHEELER, Judge.

THIS is a contest over the last will and testament of Thomas Hardenburgh, deceased.There was a trial to a jury and a verdict sustaining the will.From a judgment on the verdict the contestants appeal.Reversed.

Reversed.

J. B Rockafellow and Willard & Willard, for appellants.

C. A Meredith and Thomas B. Swan, for appellees.

OPINION

SHERWIN, J.

The contestants, Mary Rahm, Georgiana Dean, Alice H. Phelps, and Ada Lancaster, are daughters of the deceased Thomas Hardenburgh.In the contest filed by them they allege that at the time of the execution of the will on the 7th day of March, 1903, Thomas Hardenburgh was ninety years of age, and very infirm in mind and body, and did not have sufficient mental capacity to make a will or to comprehend the nature and effect of the instrument that he then signed; that the said Thomas Hardenburgh, at the time of executing the will, was laboring under delusions which influenced him in making said instrument and caused him to make a disposition of his property therein that he would not have made had he been sane and not influenced by such delusions.The delusions alleged to have existed and to have influenced the disposition of his property are stated as follows in the contest: "He, without any foundation therefor, was laboring under the delusion that his daughters were unchaste women and not fit subjects of his bounty.He, without any foundation therefor, was laboring under the delusion that his daughter Mary Rahm had attempted to, and intended to, poison him; and that he labored under the further delusion that certain of his children had stolen money and other property from him.It is further alleged that all of said delusions caused him to dislike and to become insanely prejudiced against his said daughters, and particularly against Mary Rahm, and that such prejudice caused him to devise all of his property to others.It was admitted by the contestants that the instrument offered for probate as the last will and testament of Thomas Hardenburgh was in due form and duly signed and witnessed.

The contestants produced evidence tending to show that the deceased was, at the time of executing said will, of unsound mind and generally incapable of making a valid will.The proponents took issue with this claim and produced evidence tending to show the mental capacity of the testator.At the close of all the evidence the following agreement was made and entered of record: "It is agreed by the contestants that no claim of general mental incapacity is made, and it is conceded by them that, but for the delusions claimed by them to exist in the mind of testator, he had the capacity to make the instrument in question."Following this concession on the part of the contestants, the court instructed the jury as follows: "It is not claimed that the said Thomas Hardenburgh was a lunatic or that he is what is ordinarily termed 'crazy,' but it is claimed that he entertained certain insane delusions, and that the will in question was influenced by, or the result of, such delusions."The court, in its further instructions, directed the jury that, if they found the existence of the delusions claimed by the contestants to have existed at the time the will was executed, and further found that such delusions influenced the testator at the time he executed the instrument and caused him to make a different disposition of his property than he would but for such delusions, it would defeat the will; and the court further instructed that, if either one or both of said material matters were not so shown, the verdict must be for the proponents.The appellants complain of these instructions because they eliminated from the consideration of the jury the question of the general mental incapacity of the testator, and say that, because of the testimony tending to show the general mental weakness as the result of old age, they were entitled to have the question of his general capacity submitted to the jury notwithstanding their concession.But we are unable to...