In re Younggren's Estate
| Decision Date | 20 June 1939 |
| Docket Number | 44745. |
| Citation | 286 N.W. 467,226 Iowa 1377 |
| Parties | In re YOUNGGREN'S ESTATE. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Page County; R. E. Hines, Judge.
Will contest. From an order overruling motion of proponents for directed verdict and order overruling motion for new trial and objections and exceptions to instructions, proponents have appealed.
Affirmed.
W. C Ratcliff, and R. J. Swanson, both of Red Oak, and Levi H Mattox, of Shenandoah, for appellants.
L. L Orsborn, of Red Oak, and Stephens, Thornell & Millhone, of Clarinda, for appellees.
Emma C Younggren, testatrix, was born in Sweden. She came to this country when she was twenty-two years of age and, with her husband, Gus Younggren, settled on a farm in Page county, Iowa, where she lived for 63 years. She departed this life May 1, 1936 at the age of 91 years. Her husband preceded her in death having died intestate in 1905, owning, at the time of his death, 960 acres of Iowa land and 160 acres of land in Hand county, South Dakota. Besides his wife, Emma, he left surviving him as his children and only heirs at law a daughter, Ellen, and three sons, Emil, Charley and Luther. Charley married and left home in 1898. The other three children never married and resided at home with their parents. Charley died in March, 1932, leaving his wife and four children. These four children are the contestants.
The 960 acres of land, 800 acres of which were located in Page county, Iowa, and 160 acres of which was located in Montgomery county, Iowa, was voluntarily partitioned among the testatrix, as surviving spouse, and the four children. Mrs. Younggren was allotted 320 acres and the four children, Emil, Charley, Luther, and Ellen, each received 160 acres. The South Dakota land has never been partitioned. Emil died intestate in 1922 leaving his mother as his only heir at law. At the time of his death, Emil owned 240 acres of land, 160 acres of which being the land inherited from his father, and this 240 acres passed to the mother by inheritance. The son Luther apparently had financial reverses and was compelled to mortgage the 160 acres inherited from his father and another 80 which he had subsequently purchased. The mortgage was foreclosed and the mother, testatrix, purchased this 240 acres at sheriff's sale. Subsequent to her husband's death, testatrix also purchased two other farms, one of 200 acres and the other of 240 acres, so that, at the time of her death, she owned, free of encumbrance except current taxes, 1240 acres of Iowa land appraised at $109,000, also personal property of the appraised value of $28,354.70 besides her undivided interest in the South Dakota 160 acre tract and she " owed not any man." By the terms of her will Luther received 740 acres valued at $72,400; Ellen received 300 acres valued at $19,000 and the four grandchildren, contestants, received jointly 200 acres valued at $9,000. The personal property, after payment of debts, funeral expenses and costs of administration, was divided equally,-contestants receiving one-third and Luther and Ellen each one-third. It will thus be seen that Luther got the " lion's share" of the mother's estate.
The objections to the probation of the will alleged undue influence on the part of Luther, mental incompetency and that testatrix did not understand the contents of the will. The first two grounds, undue influence and mental incompetency, on motion of proponents, were withdrawn from the jury and the only issue submitted to the jury was whether or not testatrix, at the time of the execution of the purported will, understood the contents thereof. It was the contention of the contestants that testatrix did not understand the English language and that the will was prepared in the English language and read over to her in English and the contents thereof was never explained to her in her native tongue, the Swedish language. The court instructed the jury that, under the evidence, the said purported will was properly signed by testatrix and it was properly witnessed by two witnesses, as required by the law of the State of Iowa, and that this created a presumption that, at the time of the execution of the instrument, testatrix understood the contents thereof and the said will would be admitted to probate unless the contestants showed by a preponderance of the evidence that at said time the testatrix did not understand the contents thereof. The correctness of this statement of the law is not disputed. Proponents do contend, however, that since the issues of undue influence and mental incompetency were withdrawn from the jury, from which no appeal was taken, the presumption that testatrix understood the contents of the will when executed became a conclusive one and left nothing to be submitted to the jury. The case was twice tried in the court below. Both times the jury returned a verdict for the contestants. If, therefore, there was evidence reasonably sufficient to warrant the court in submitting this question to the jury, it would seem that we should be loathe to set the verdict aside.
Under the record submitted, the question is not of easy solution and is not entirely free from doubt in the mind of the writer of this opinion but, when all the facts and circumstances are carefully considered, the court is persuaded that the trial court was right in submitting the matter to the jury.
The will was prepared by George A. Anderson, an attorney of Clarinda, Iowa, an old-time acquaintance and friend of the Younggren family, who spoke the Swedish language fluently. The mystery in the plot arises from the fact that the will was typed by attorney Anderson who, at the time of the trial was deceased. The evidence is entirely circumstantial as to when or from whom Anderson obtained the information from which he prepared the will. Mrs. Anderson, wife of the scrivener, worked in her husband's office but her testimony throws no light on this question except that she did testify that Luther, between the 1st of April and July 6, 1932, was in her husband's office several times. The will was executed July 6, 1932, which was on Wednesday, and the daughter Ellen testified that, on the preceding Sunday, Mr. Anderson with his wife were at the Younggren home and Mr. Anderson talked with her mother at that time. This is flatly denied by Mrs. Anderson. She testified that she was not at the Younggren home on this particular Sunday; however, she was unable to state where they were on that Sunday. There is, also, the circumstance of the probability of the will having been prepared from information received from someone who was able to point out the various farms so as to enable the scrivener to obtain the legal description; for the will contains a legal description of the land devised to Luther and Ellen which is followed by a paragraph devising and bequeathing the remainder, in equal shares, to Luther, Ellen and the grandchildren and we think it is fairly apparent that, while Mrs. Younggren, the testatrix, was probably able to make reference to the farms by their names,-as the record shows that each of the farms was referred to by a certain name-, she would not be able to furnish the scrivener with the particular legal congressional description of the several tracts of land. The will was prepared in the English language and attorney Anderson, together with his wife, went to the home of testatrix and the evidence is that, at that time, the will was read over to Mrs. Younggren in English and, again, there is a direct conflict as to whether Anderson discussed the will with the testatrix in her native tongue. Mrs. Anderson, one of the subscribing witnesses, said this was not done in so far as she heard and that she was there at the time. On the other hand, Ellen, who was there in the home at the time, testified that she heard attorney Anderson discussing the terms of the will with her mother in the Swedish language. Mrs. Anderson, although a subscribing witness, we think, seemed a rather willing witness for the contestants. She admitted that her husband spoke nothing but the Swedish language to Mrs. Younggren in all his conversations with her that day but says he did not talk to her concerning the terms of...
To continue reading
Request your trial