Rothrock v. Rothrock
Decision Date | 21 June 1892 |
Citation | 30 P. 453,22 Or. 551 |
Parties | ROTHROCK et al. v. ROTHROCK et al. |
Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Umatilla county; MORTON D. CLIFFORD Judge.
Suit by Jesse M. Rothrock and others against Lucretia C. Rothrock and others. From a decree for defendants, complainants appeal. Affirmed.
The other facts fully appear in the following statement by STRAHAN, C.J.:
This is a contest as to the validity of the will of A.B. Rothrock deceased. After said will had been probated in common form the appellants filed a petition in the county court of Umatilla county, wherein they alleged, among other things that at the time of his death the said A.B. Rothrock was of about the age of 74 years, and that, in consequence of old age and other causes, his mind was seriously impaired and shattered, and his memory destroyed, and at the date thereof and for a long time prior thereto and thereafter, and up to the time of his death, he was incapable of exercising any judgment whatever over his property, or in any other manner. That the mental condition of the said A.B. Rothrock, Sr., at the date of the execution of said alleged will, and for a long time prior thereto, had been such that he was easily persuaded in the course of his conduct, and the attempt to make or execute the alleged will heretofore set forth, or to dispose of his estate or property therein provided, was the result of undue influence exercised upon him, and by the said Lucretia C. Rothrock, John William Rothrock, and A.B. Rothrock, Jr., and other parties acting for them and in their interest; and the said alleged will was not, in fact, the will of the said A.B. Rothrock, Sr. That the value of the estate of the said A.B. Rothrock, Sr., was of about the sum of $12,000, and consisted of real and personal property. That the said alleged will above described was not executed by the said A.B. Rothrock, Sr., with the formality or in any manner prescribed by law, and is of no validity, and is void. That the said A.B. Rothrock, Sr., at the time of the execution of said alleged will, was of unsound mind, and incapable of understanding the business in which he was engaged at the time he executed said alleged will, and that said alleged will was not the product of his own free agency. That said alleged will was the result and the cause of the fraudulent and undue influence and constraint exercised upon and over him by the said Lucretia C. Rothrock, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
President, etc., of Bowdoin College v. Merritt
... ... the free and untrammeled action of the mind. ' Carty ... v. Connolly, 91 Cal. 15, 20, 27 P. 599; Rothrock v ... Rothrock, 22 Or. 551, 30 P. 453; Ayres v ... Ayres, 43 N.J.Eq. 565, 12 A. 621; King v ... Humphreys, 138 Pa.St. 310, 315, 22 A. 19; ... ...
-
Jackson v. United States National Bank, Portland, Ore.
...revoke letters testamentary * * *." Act of 1862, now found in ORS 5.040; Bain v. Cline, 1893, 24 Or. 175, 33 P. 542; Rothrock v. Rothrock, 1892, 22 Or. 551, 30 P. 453; Potter v. Jones, 1891, 20 Or. 239, 25 P. 769, 12 L.R.A. 161; Luper v. Werts, 1890, 19 Or. 122, 23 P. 850; Chrisman v. Chris......
-
In re Phillips' Will
...12 L. R. A. 161; Luper v. Werts, 19 Or. 122, 23 P. 850, 7 Am. Probate Rep. 243; Franke v. Shipley, 22 Or. 104, 29 P. 268; Rothrock v. Rothrock, 22 Or. 551, 30 P. 453; re Cline's Will, 24 Or. 175, 33 P. 542, 41 Am. St. Rep. 851; Carnagie v. Diven, 31 Or. 366, 49 P. 891; Swank v. Swank, 37 Or......
-
Nook v. Zuck
...How otherwise could parties who understood no common language become mutually bound to any written contract?" In Rothrock v. Rothrock, 22 Or. 551, 30 Pac. 453, the will of a speechless paralytic, 74 years of age, whose mind was unimpaired, was held valid where his wishes as to the dispositi......