In re Repp's Estate, No. 47512.
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Iowa |
Writing for the Court | HALE |
Citation | 241 Iowa 190,40 N.W.2d 607 |
Parties | In re REPP'S ESTATE. |
Decision Date | 10 January 1950 |
Docket Number | No. 47512. |
241 Iowa 190
40 N.W.2d 607
In re REPP'S ESTATE.
No. 47512.
Supreme Court of Iowa.
Jan. 10, 1950.
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of Ivan Repp, deceased, by Elmyra L. McLaughlin against Cal Repp to contest a will.
The Monroe District Court, Edward L. Simmons, J., after a verdict for the proponent granted contestant's motion for new trial, and proponent appealed.
The Supreme Court, Hale, J., held that the submission of conflicting statements of the two subscribing witnesses to the jury was proper, and that exclusion of testimony of witness who allegedly did not sign in presence of testator and other witness was not prejudicial, and reversed the order granting a new trial.
[40 N.W.2d 608]
Hugh W. Lundy, of Albia, and Campbell & Campbell, of Newton, for appellant.
Alfred M. Pabst, of Albia, for appellee.
HALE, Justice.
On May 24, 1948, there was filed in the office of the clerk of the district court of Monroe county an affidavit of death of Ivan L. Repp, who died on May 22, 1948, and an instrument purported to be the last will and testament of the said Ivan L. Repp. The will was dated January 5, 1948, but was executed February 14, 1948, and provides for the payment of debts, funeral expenses, and costs, and the appointment of executor. It provided that the receipts from the sale of his property be divided proportionally among various persons named, being nephews and nieces, and grandnephews and grandnieces, and provided for the distribution of specific articles of household and personal property. The will was signed by the testator and bore an attestation clause signed by M. C. Lowenberg and Betty E. Hersman, which clause will be referred to hereafter.
Elmyra L. McLaughlin filed in said office objections to admission to probate of the purported will of Evan L. Repp, deceased. Reciting, among other things, that the sole and only heirs of deceased are certain brothers and sisters named, together with the objector; reciting that decedent was unduly influenced in the making of said instrument. The objections further state that the instrument offered for probate ‘was not executed in accordance with the statute of wills as set forth in the statutes of Iowa governing the execution of instruments, in that the signature of the decedent was not witnessed by the persons purporting to act as witnesses, and in fact they did not see the decedent sign said will nor thereafter was his signature in any way acknowledged by him to said witnesses, and that therefore said instrument fails to meet the statutory requirement that his execution of said instrument and his signature thereof was witnessed by two or more competent witnesses. That the witnesses purporting to sign said will did not at any time sign the same in the presence of the decedent, Ivan Repp,’ and ask that the admission of the will to probate be denied.
The case was tried to a jury who, on December 16, 1948, returned a verdict admitting
[40 N.W.2d 609]
the will to probate. Thereafter contestant filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict, and also a motion for new trial. Motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict was overruled; motion for new trial sustained, and the verdict of the jury set aside and new trial ordered. From the order of court granting a new trial the proponent, Cal Repp, appeals.
At the trial the only issue was the contestant's claim that the will was not properly witnessed. There was no issue nor question that the decedent did not sign the will, and there was no issue that the two witnesses did not sign the certificate of attestation. The attestation certificate, as set out, contained recitals of all facts necessary to constitute the due execution and witnessing of the will. The claim of the proponent is that this certificate of attestation made a prima facie case for proponent, furnishing a presumption of fact that the recitals contained in it were true.
M. C. Lowenberg, engaged in real estate business, had an office in Albia, and in January Ivan Repp came to his office bringing with him notes as to the disposition of his property and Lowenberg undertook to prepare a will embodying Repp's wishes. He testified that he prepared such a will and that on February 14th Repp came to his office to sign the will; that there was no one in the office except Repp and Lowenberg and that the latter went to a nearby office and requested Betty E. Hersman, employed there, to come to his office and act as a witness; that the witnesses on the same occasion and in his presence both signed as witnesses on or about the 14th day of February, the date of the attestation certificate. Betty E. Hersman, however, testified that she came to Lowenberg's office, saw the decedent at the desk, saw Lowenberg hand the decedent the pen, saw the decedent place the pen in proper position on the paper to be signed, saw his hand shaking but never saw the signature. She testified that she was called to her own office by the ringing of her telephone, was not back in Lowenberg's office that day, and that she did not sign the instrument that day, nor in the presence of decedent. She testified further that some weeks or months later Lowenberg came to a filling station near here place of residence; that she was called out and that she signed the paper there in the presence of Lowenberg, and that the decedent was not present at that time. This testimony was in contradiction to part of Lowenberg's...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Klein v. Castorf (In re Klein's Estate), No. 47617.
...been no attestation certificate. In re, Estate of Olson, supra, 239 Iowa 1149, 1154, 1155, 34 N.W.2d 207, 210;In re Repp's Estate, Iowa, 40 N.W.2d 607, 610, 611; Anno. 76 A.L.R. 617, 622. Knopf's prior uncertainty or failure of memory as to having seen testatrix sign is not sufficient to ov......
-
Iowa Power & Light Co. v. Abild Const. Co., No. 51665
...88 C.J.S. Trial § 62c, p. 170. Where the materiality is not apparent, the party offering it must disclose it. In In Re Repp's Estate, 241 Iowa 190, 40 N.W.2d 607, 610, we quote with approval from Votaw & Hartshorn v. Diehl, 62 Iowa 676, 13 N.W. 757, 18 N.W. 305, as follows: 'The true rule, ......
-
Law v. Hemmingsen, No. 49409
...conversation. Such a foundation was necessary. In re Will of Smith, 245 Iowa 38, 47-48, 60 N.W.2d 866, 871-872; In re Estate of Repp, 241 Iowa 190, 195, 40 N.W.2d 607, 610; Richmond Bros. v. Sundburg & Co., 77 Iowa 255, 258, 42 N.W. 184; People v. Perri, 381 Ill. 244, 44 N.E.2d 857, 859; Ca......
-
Murphy's Estate, In re, No. 39054--5
...supra; Lott v. Lott, supra; In re Estate of Holden, supra. 5 Estate of McCarthy, 265 Wis. 548, 61 N.W.2d 819; In re Estate of Repp, 241 Iowa 190, 40 N.W.2d 607; In re Dalton Estate, 346 Mich. 613, 624, 78 N.W.2d 266, 271; Annotation, 76 A.L.R. 617, 622. 6 All of the cases cited in footnote ......
-
Klein v. Castorf (In re Klein's Estate), No. 47617.
...been no attestation certificate. In re, Estate of Olson, supra, 239 Iowa 1149, 1154, 1155, 34 N.W.2d 207, 210;In re Repp's Estate, Iowa, 40 N.W.2d 607, 610, 611; Anno. 76 A.L.R. 617, 622. Knopf's prior uncertainty or failure of memory as to having seen testatrix sign is not sufficient to ov......
-
Iowa Power & Light Co. v. Abild Const. Co., No. 51665
...88 C.J.S. Trial § 62c, p. 170. Where the materiality is not apparent, the party offering it must disclose it. In In Re Repp's Estate, 241 Iowa 190, 40 N.W.2d 607, 610, we quote with approval from Votaw & Hartshorn v. Diehl, 62 Iowa 676, 13 N.W. 757, 18 N.W. 305, as follows: 'The true rule, ......
-
Law v. Hemmingsen, No. 49409
...conversation. Such a foundation was necessary. In re Will of Smith, 245 Iowa 38, 47-48, 60 N.W.2d 866, 871-872; In re Estate of Repp, 241 Iowa 190, 195, 40 N.W.2d 607, 610; Richmond Bros. v. Sundburg & Co., 77 Iowa 255, 258, 42 N.W. 184; People v. Perri, 381 Ill. 244, 44 N.E.2d 857, 859; Ca......
-
Murphy's Estate, In re, No. 39054--5
...supra; Lott v. Lott, supra; In re Estate of Holden, supra. 5 Estate of McCarthy, 265 Wis. 548, 61 N.W.2d 819; In re Estate of Repp, 241 Iowa 190, 40 N.W.2d 607; In re Dalton Estate, 346 Mich. 613, 624, 78 N.W.2d 266, 271; Annotation, 76 A.L.R. 617, 622. 6 All of the cases cited in footnote ......