In re Bottger's Estate
| Decision Date | 30 September 1942 |
| Docket Number | 28688. |
| Citation | 129 P.2d 518,14 Wn.2d 676 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | In re BOTTGER'S ESTATE. v. BOTTGER. BOTTGER et al. |
Department 1.
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of Ida Bottger, deceased, wherein Herman Bottger and others filed a petition against Charlotte Bottger seeking to have decedent's will declared void and the probate thereof revoked and to have set aside two deeds which the decedent had executed a year or more Before her death. From a decree cancelling the purported will, setting aside the deeds, and revoking Charlotte Bottger's letters of administration with the will annexed and appointing a special administrator of the estate of decedent, Charlotte Bottger appeals.
Reversed with direction.
Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; R. M Webster, judge.
Clyde H. Belknap, of Spokane, for appellant.
A. O Colburn and Orville W. Duell. both of Spokane, for respondents.
Upon the admission to probate of the purported will of Ida Bottger, deceased, five of her children and four of her grandchildren filed in the pending probate cause a petition seeking to have the decedent's will declared null and void and the probate thereof revoked, and further seeking to have set aside two deeds which the decedent had executed a year or more Before her death. The petition was directed against Harry Bottger, another child of the decedent, who was named as executor and the principal beneficiary in the will and as sole grantee in each of the two deeds. The prayer of the petition was based upon allegations that at the time of executing the purported deeds and will the decedent was of unsound mind and unable to comprehend the nature of her acts and was, furthermore, acting under undue influence exerted upon her by Harry Bottger and his wife, Charlotte Bottger. Shortly after the filing of the petition contesting the will and attacking the deeds, Harry Bottger died, and his wife, to whom he had left the bulk of his property, was thereafter appointed administratrix with the will annexed of the estate of Ida Bottger and was in consequence thereof substituted as defendant in the contest proceeding. In her answer to the petition herein, Charlotte Bottger denied the allegations of testamentary incapacity on the part of Ida Bottger and of undue influence exerted upon her, and affirmatively alleged that all of the petitioners had, prior to Ida Bottger's death, executed quitclaim deeds conveying to Harry Bottger any interest then held or thereafter acquired by them in the property theretofore conveyed by the two deeds from Ida Bottger to Harry Bottger, and that petitioners were therefore estopped to question the validity of the conveyances from Ida Bottger to her son. Petitioners replied, alleging that these quitclaim deeds were executed and delivered by them upon the understanding and agreement between themselves and Harry Bottger that Ida Bottger, then still alive, had not made, and would not make, a will disinheriting the petitioners, and that the estate of Ida Bottger, with the exception of the property theretofore conveyed by her to her son Harry, should be divided equally among the parties to the agreement. The contest proceeding was tried to the court, sitting without a jury, and resulted in a decree cancelling the purported will, setting aside the deeds and quitclaim deeds, revoking Charlotte Bottger's letters of administration with the will annexed, and appointing a special administrator of the estate of Ida Bottger. The defendant, Charlotte Bottger, has appealed.
Ida Bottger, the decedent referred to in this action, was born in Germany in 1847 and died in this state on January 2, 1941. She came to this county when she was about fifteen years of age, later met and married one John F. Bottger, a middle western farmer, and for many years thereafter lived and worked with him upon a farm in the state of Iowa. They had nine children: Herman, Charles, Jesse, William, George, Harry, Hannah (Hoft), Belle (Wynia) and Rose (Nye). Herman was the oldest of the children, Harry was the youngest. Rose died some time prior to 1939, leaving as heirs two children, Robert Nye and Betty Straw, (referred to in the title of the case as 'Belle Shaw', and at times in the record as 'Betty Shaw.'). Jesse, a bachelor, died July 13, 1939, about eighteen months prior to the death of his mother, and, as will hereinafter more fully appear, the present litigation is the consequence of his demise. Charles died on October 9, 1939, leaving two sons, Laurence and Howard. Harry Bottger died April 8, 1941, subsequent to the death of his mother, but after the present action had been commenced. Ida Bottger's five presently surviving children (Herman, William, George, Hannah, and Belle) and the four grandchildren (Robert, Betty, Laurence and Howard) are the respondents in this action.
About the year 1900, the entire Bottger family moved from Iowa to Spokane county in this state, although not all of them came at the same time. John and Ida Bottger, the father and mother, finally settled on a farm on Half Moon Prairie, near the city of Spokane, where they both lived until John Bottger's death in 1914 and where Ida Bottger continued to reside until her death in 1941.
Prior to the time of John Bottger's death, the son Jesse owned and occupied a farm not far distant from the home of his parents. After his father's death, Jesse moved in with his mother and from that time on operated the home place together with his own farm. In addition to his farming operations, he also engaged in the vocation of auctioneer throughout the surrounding region. He appears to have been very successful in his ventures, accumulating an estate of over $17,000, consisting of land, securities, and cash on deposit in a number of banks. He took good care of his mother and concededly was the favorite among her children although she seems to have been quite fond of all her other children and of her grandchildren as well. The general family relations appear to have been amicable until the time of Jesse's deaht.
Sometime in the year 1922 Jesse Bottger and his mother became acquainted with appellant Charlotte Bottger, who was then an unmarried woman. At various times thereafter, and until her marriage to Harry Bottger in 1938, she worked for Jesse in a traveling cookhouse which he used in connection with his harvesting operations, and at other times she worked as a domestic for Ida Bottger in the latter's home.
Jesse Bottger died intestate on July 13, 1939, and his brothers and sisters at first apparently thought that they were all entitled to share in his estate. At the instance of William Bottger, however, they consulted Mr. Clyde H. Belknap, the attorney now representing appellant, and were advised by him that their mother, Ida Bottger, to whom we shall hereinafter frequently refer simply as 'Mrs. Bottger,' was Jesse's sole heir. Mrs. Bottger, however, did not wish to act as administratrix, and upon her petition Herman and Harry, the oldest and youngest of her children, were appointed co-administrators of Jesse Bottger's estate. At that time, Herman was employed by an industrial concern in Spokane, and Harry, who had married Charlotte about a year Before , was operating a rented farm about ten miles distant from his mother's place.
On the day following Jesse's death, Charlotte, at the request of Mrs. Bottger, who was then ninety-two years of age, moved into the latter's home and continued to reside there until the elderly lady's death. Charlotte was not hired to come there, nor was she ever paid anything for the services which she rendered. In October, 1940, Harry rented and moved onto a farm near his mother's home, taking a year's lease thereon, and during that period of time did a good deal of work on the farm occupied by Mrs. Bottger. Some time in that same year he moved in with his wife and mother and lived on the home place until his death in 1941.
Meanwhile, in September, 1939, Ida Bottger concluded to convey to Harry the home place and also a farm which she had inherited from Jesse, these two farms being valued at about four thousand dollars. Contemplating that disposition, she consulted Mr. Belknap, who advised her not to give away her property in her lifetime but rather to dispose of it by will. She was further told to think the matter over carefully Before making any final decision. She returned to Mr. Belknap's office about a week later, September 18, 1939, but had not altered her original intention. She thereupon executed a deed conveying to Harry the farm which she had inherited from Jesse. She could not convey the home farm at that time, simply because the record title was in John F. Bottger, her husband, and his estate had never been probated. She therefore petitioned the court for letters of administration upon her husband's estate to be issued to her son Harry, and shortly thereafter obtained an order of court setting aside to herself that entire estate in lieu of homestead and other exemptions provided by law. She then, on October 16, 1939, conveyed the home place to Harry. These are the two conveyances which have been subjected to attack by respondents in this action.
On February 5, 1940, Mrs. Bottger executed the will here in question, bequeathing ten dollars to each of the respondents and leaving to Harry the residue of her estate, which for the most part consisted of the inheritance derived from Jesse's estate. The circumstances under which that will was executed constitute the principal basis of the present proceeding and will be detailed later.
Three days Before the execution of the will, the respondents Herman, George and William Bottger, Belle Wynia, and Hannah Hoft, children of Ida Bottger, signed a petition for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mims v. United States
...12; 32 C.J.S. Evidence § 569(3) p. 623. 23 Johnson v. Johnson, N.D., 104 N.W.2d 8, 82 A.L.R.2d 1029, 1038 (1960); In re Bottger's Estate, 14 Wash.2d 676, 129 P.2d 518; Dowling v. Luisetti, 351 Mo. 514, 173 S.W.2d 381. 24 State Board of Medical Examiners of New Jersey v. Plager, 118 N.J.L. 4......
-
Stormon v. Weiss
...will may be called as a witness and examined and cross-examined the same as any other subscribing witness. See, also, In re Bottger's Estate, 14 Wash.2d 676, 129 P.2d 518; Underhill on the Law of Wills, Sec. Up to this point we have determined that the evidence on the issue of incapacity is......
-
Riley's Estate, In re
...may not be sufficient to support the clear, cogent, and convincing requirements with which we are faced. In the Bottger case, 14 Wash.2d at page 687, 129 P.2d at page 523, it was pointed out that a testator 'does not have to be a literarian, a financial genius, an athlete, or an expert cook......
-
Estate of Vick, Matter of
...Neill v. Brackett, 234 Mass. 367, 126 N.E. 93 (1920); In re Dand's Estate, 41 Wash.2d 158, 247 P.2d 1016 (1952); In re Bottger's Estate, 14 Wash.2d 676, 129 P.2d 518 (1942); Matter of Robinson's Estate, 231 Kan. 300, 644 P.2d 420 (1982); In re Spillette's Estate, 352 Mich. 12, 88 N.W.2d 300......
-
Chapter c. undue influence
...was alleged, courts in fewer than 20 found the evidence sufficient to establish that fact. 215 See, e.g., In re Bottger's Estate, 14 Wn.2d 676, 701, 129 P.2d 518 (1942); Dean v. Jordan, 194 Wash. 661, 671, 79 P.2d 331 (1938); In re Patterson's Estate, 68 Wash. 377, 384, 123 P. 515 (1912); C......
-
Chapter a. testamentary capacity
...was 18 years. 3 See generally 1 Jeffrey A. Schoenblum, Page on the Law of Wills §§12.2-12.5 (2003 & Supp. 2016). 4 In re Bottger's Estate, 14 Wn.2d 676, 685, 129 P.2d 518 (1942). The test was stated in almost identical terms as early as Hartley v. Lord, 38 Wash. 221, 226, 80 P. 433 5 See Th......
-
Chapter 26
...749, 785 P.2d 484 (1990): 4.4(3)(e) Botka v. Estate of Hoerr, 105 Wn.App. 974, 21 P.3d 723 (2001): 13.3(3)(a) Bottger's Estate, In re, 14 Wn.2d 676, 129 P.2d 518 (1942): 2.4(2)(a), 3.3(5)(c), 13.3(2)(b), 13.3(2)(d), 13.3(3)(b) Bowechop, In re Estate of, 52 Wn.App. 775, 764 P.2d 657 (1988): ......
-
Chapter 13.3 Will Contests
...do not compel a conclusion that an individual lacks testamentary capacity. Estate of Alsup, 181 Wn.App. at 856; In re Estate of Bottger, 14 Wn.2d 676, 697, 129 P.2d 518 (1942). The test for determining testamentary capacity is different than the standards applied for determining whether an ......