In re Johnson's Estate
Decision Date | 08 March 1921 |
Citation | 100 Or. 142,196 P. 385 |
Parties | IN RE JOHNSON'S ESTATE. v. HELMER ET AL. JOHNSON |
Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Department 2.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; Geo. Tazwell, Judge.
In the matter of the estate of Michael Johnson, deceased. Contest by Elin Johnson against Eric Helmer, executor of the alleged last will and testament of Michael Johnson, and others. From a decree sustaining the will, contestant appeals. Reversed.
This is a proceeding to contest the will of Michael Johnson deceased. A decree was passed sustaining the will, and contestant appeals.
The will of Michael Johnson was admitted to probate in common form on September 10, 1918, and the testimony of the two subscribing witnesses was given in open court, reduced to writing, signed by them, attested by the judge presiding, and filed. Eric Helmer, named as executor in the will, was appointed executor, and qualified as such. On March 13, 1919 Elin Johnson, mother of Michael Johnson, a resident and inhabitant of the kingdom of Sweden, by her attorney in fact F. H. Whitfield, filed a petition and notice of contest wherein contestant attacks the validity of said will on three grounds: (1) Unsound mind; (2) undue influence; (3) "after making said pretended will the same was and has been tampered with, parts of which are stricken out and other parts inserted after it was executed and witnessed, and thereby rendered void on its face, and that it should be discarded; that it is ambiguous, and not the will of said deceased."
The respondents filed their answer to the petition, denying all the matters alleged in it, as grounds for setting the will aside; and for a further and separate answer the respondents set forth the facts admitted in the answer; that Michael Johnson, on the date of the execution of the will, to wit August 31, 1918, was of the age of 48 years, of sound mind, mentally competent to make his last will; that Eric Helmer was named as executor, and is competent; that the legatees under the will were Edward Johnson, to whom was bequeathed the automobile, Charles Ek, to whom was bequeathed the private library, and Swedish Society Linnea, to which was bequeathed the residue of the estate in trust; the probate of the will in common form, and the admission of the will to probate; that Michael Johnson disposed of his property in conformity with his own desire, was competent so to do, acted voluntarily, and was not influenced by any one; that the erasure and annotation found on said will were made by Michael Johnson himself in his lifetime, and are immaterial and no part of the will, and do not affect its validity; and praying for the admission of said will to probate after due hearing, and that it be declared the last and only valid will of Michael Johnson, deceased.
The contestant thereafter filed the reply to the new matter, practically reiterating the allegations of the petition.
After first ordering his just debts and funeral expenses paid, the will reads thus:
A printed form of will was used and filled out in typewriting. In the second clause there is a heavy dark line run through part of it with pen and ink. It was not stricken out when signed and witnessed, and does not appear by whom it was done, probably by the decedent. After the typewritten portion above quoted there is another clause added in his handwriting to this effect:
"And I hereby ask that this package and letters be sent to those proper addresses that I have left here in my writing desk."
After the execution of the will, and apparently on the same day, the decedent wrote, in the Swedish language, a letter which is translated as follows:
Thanks for all Linnea has done for me and all good comradeship, with high regards.
Mike Johnson."
Also postscript: "Let my brother, Gust, have my clothes and small articles if he wants them.
"Mike Johnson."
Upon the reprobate of the will in solemn form, Mr. Michael J. MacMahon, an attorney at law, testified to the effect that he had known Michael Johnson, deceased, some 25 years; that he drew the will at the request of decedent; that Johnson told him of the property he possessed, and told him how he wanted it disposed of; that he wrote the will as Johnson directed; that he and the other witness, Mr. F. H. Patten, were present when Michael Johnson signed the instrument, and both witnessed it at his request. On cross-examination Mr. MacMahon stated that the writing with pen and ink, above quoted, was not contained in the document when it was signed; that there was no "scratching out"; that he was not a witness to the changes; that Johnson was going to leave the will with him, but changed his mind and took it away; that he could not tell what was stricken out; that there were two changes made, one stricken out with heavy ink and one in writing. Mr. MacMahon further stated (we quote from proponent's brief):
Over the objection of contestant's counsel the testimony of F. H. Patten, who died before the hearing of the contest, taken in the probate of the will in common form, was admitted in evidence.
Mrs. Wm. Lovegren testified in part thus:
Johnson wrote her a letter, which we quote:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Johnson's Estate
...2. Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; George Tazwell, Judge. On petition to tax costs to respondent. Petition denied. See, also, 196 P. 385. F. H. Whitfield and Isham N. Smith, both Portland, for appellant. Waldemar Seton, of Portland, for respondents. BEAN, J. As will be seen by ......