Potter v. Baldwin
| Decision Date | 02 October 1882 |
| Parties | Ira G. Potter, executor, v. Joseph W. Baldwin |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Hampden. Appeal from a decree of the Probate Court, allowing the will of John Baldwin, by his only son and heir at law. Hearing in this court, before W. Allen, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows:
No question was made as to the formal execution of the will, and the only issue submitted to the jury was whether the will was obtained by the undue influence of Mrs. Francelia S. Lane. The will was dated January 30, 1880, and by it the testator devised and bequeathed his entire estate to said Lane. The testator died on February 17, 1880.
The judge admitted, against the appellee's objection, for the purpose of showing the state of feeling of the testator towards Lane, evidence of conversations between the testator and his son and son's wife, in 1872, in which it was testified that the testator said he was so under the influence of Lane that he could not resist her when he was in her presence. This was but a small portion of the conversations admitted, all of which was of the same character, and was admitted upon the statement of the appellant's counsel that they expected to show similar expressions of feeling from time to time up to the date of the will; and such expressions were testified to.
The judge also admitted, against the appellee's objection for the same purpose, and to show his state of mind towards his son, evidence of a conversation between the testator and one Edward O'Neil, on the night of February 16, to the effect that the testator said he wished to see his son Joseph, and that he did not know but he had been deceived. These conversations were used by the counsel for the appellant in his argument to the jury as showing undue influence and deception by Lane. No instructions were given to the jury, or asked, as to the use or effect of the foregoing evidence.
The jury found that the will was obtained by the undue influence of Lane; and the appellee alleged exceptions.
Exceptions overruled.
D. W Bond, for the appellee.
G. Wells, (N. A. Leonard with him,) for the appellant.
The evidence of conversations between the testator and his son and son's wife in 1872, wherein he said that he was so under the influence of Francelia S. Lane that he could not resist her when he was in her presence, in connection with similar expressions of feeling up to the date of the will, was properly admitted for the purpose of showing the state of the testator's feeling towards her. Shailer v. Bumstead, 99 Mass. 112. Lewis v. Mason, 109 Mass. 169. They strongly resemble those received in May v. Bradlee, 127 Mass. 414, where the question was whether a testator was induced by undue influence to revoke a will, to the effect that a certain person (through whose influence it was contended that the will was revoked) told him to erase his name, and that he felt that he had to do as this person said.
Upon similar grounds, the evidence of a conversation the night before he died, in which he stated that he wished "to see his son Joseph, and that he did not know but that he had been deceived," was admissible to show his state of feeling towards his son and Francelia...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fulton v. Freeland
...Estate, 28 Colo. 168; Clough v. Clough, 10 Colo.App. 443; In re Flint's Estate, 100 Cal. 391; In re Rufino, 116 Cal. 316; Potter v. Baldwin, 133 Mass. 427; v. Stearns, 76 Mo. 396; Sunderland v. Hood, 84 Mo. 293; Fingley v. Cowgill, 48 Mo. 296; Cowgill v. Kennedy, 24 So. 459; Davis v. Calver......
-
Shepard v. United States, 564.
...unless it is part of the res gestæ or a dying declaration. In re Calkins' Estate supra; Shailer v. Bumstead, 99 Mass. 112; Potter v. Baldwin, 133 Mass. 427; Waterman v. Whitney, 11 N. Y. 157, 168, 62 Am. Dec. 71; Marx v. McGlynn, 88 N. Y. 357, 374; Bush v. Bush, 87 Mo. 480; Griffith v. Diff......
-
Rankin v. Rankin
...v. Thompson, 14 Pa. 149; Dennis v. Weekes, 51 Ga. 24; Rusling v. Rusling, 35 N. J. Eq. 120; Marx v. McGlynn, 88 N. Y. 358; Potter v. Baldwin, 133 Mass. 427; note to Hess' Will, 31 Am. St. Rep. 690. As to the nature and character of such declarations that will thus be admitted in evidence, t......
-
Com. v. Trefethen
...have exercised undue influence. Shailer v. Bumstead, 99 Mass. 112; Lewis v. Mason, 109 Mass. 169; May v. Bradlee, 127 Mass. 414; Potter v. Baldwin, 133 Mass. 427; v. Sullivan, 152 Mass. 470, 25 N.E. 837; Pickens v. Davis, 134 Mass. 252. Upon an issue whether there was an intentional gift or......