Wheeler v. Whipple

Citation14 A. 275,44 N.J.E. 141
PartiesWHEELER et al. v. WHIPPLE.
Decision Date25 May 1888
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)

Appeal from orphans' court, Monmouth county; LANNING, BENNETT, and HENDRICKSON, Judges.

Appeal by Ophelia M. Wheeler and Emma L. Kingsbury from a decree of the orphans' court admitting to probate an instrument purporting to be the last will and testament of Betsy Ann Kingsbury.

Frank P. McDermitt and E. W. Arrowsmith, for appellants. William H. Vredenburgh, for respondent.

MCGILL, Ordinary. This is an appeal from a decree which admits to probate a paper purporting to be the last will of Betsy Ann Kingsbury, who died unmarried at Ocean Grove, in this state, in September, 1886, at the age of 65 years. The disputed paper was executed on the 2d day of June, 1883, and gives the entire estate of the decedent to Myra Whipple, who was Miss Kingsbury's companion for the 15 years immediately preceding her death. The appellants were the caveatrices below, and are the nieces and next of kin of the decedent. They claim that the disputed instrument is the product of undue influence which was exercised by Myra Whipple. It appears that, in the year of 1871, Miss Kingsbury was ill for several months, at a place called Hancock, in the state of New York, with some affection of the brain, and that during that illness she was, for many weeks, delirious, and, at times, for days wholly unconscious. Through her sickness she was cared for by her brother Elisha and his wife, who not only personally attended her, but also provided her with a skilled nurse. As she was convalescing the brother procured Myra Whipple, then a girl of 15 years of age, and the daughter of a cousin, to be her companion and reside with her. From that time till her death, some 15 years, Myra was Miss Kingsbury's constant companion. In 1880 they moved from Hancock to Deposit, a distance of about 12 miles, and in 1881 they took up their residence in Ocean Grove in this state. Elisha Kingsbury died in 1875, without leaving any issue. By his will he bequeathed to Myra Whipple, because of her kindness to his sister, the sum of $3,000. After Miss Kingsbury and Myra went to Ocean Grove, they each purchased a house. That which Miss Kingsbury bought was leased, and the two ladies occupied the house which belonged to Myra. It is in evidence that, at times, after 1871, Miss Kingsbury complained of loss of memory, and was somewhat eccentric in her behavior, and also that she intrusted Myra with almost all her business affairs, using her as her amenuensis and general adviser. It is plain that the relations between the two ladies were most intimate and confidential. While Elisha Kingsbury lived he managed his sister's investments. After his death this work was given to William Kingsbury, a cousin, who performed the same services for compensation. It docs not appear that the appellants, who are the children of a deceased brother of Miss Kingsbury, ever paid attention to their aunt in such a way as to secure a place in her affections, or indeed that any of Miss Kingsbury's relatives, other than Myra Whipple, took more than a nominal interest in her. Up to her death the testatrix was in good health. Her physician says that she died from apoplexy, which was induced by a cold sea bath, which she imprudently took while she was overheated. The disputed will was drawn by David Harvey, Jr., a member of the bar of this state of excellent reputation. He says that the instrument was prepared after he had received verbal instructions from Miss Kingsbury, in person, at his office in Ocean Grove; that Miss Kingsbury came alone to the office, and that he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • In re Raynolds' Estate
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 16, 1942
    ......Kise v. Heath, 33 N.J.Eq. 239; Earle v. Norfolk & N. B. Hosiery Co., 36 N.J.Eq. 188, 192, affirmed Earle v. Roberts, 37 N.J.Eq. 315; Wheeler v. Whipple, 44 N.J.Eq. 141, 14 A. 275, affirmed 45 N.J.Eq. 367, 19 A. 621; Dumont v. Dumont, 46 N.J.Eq. 223, 19 A. 467; Schuchhardt v. Schuchhardt, ......
  • In Re Starr's Estate, in Re
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • December 26, 1935
    ......701;. Collins v. Osborn, 34 N.J.Eq. 511; Brick v. Brick, 43 N.J.Eq. 167, 10 A. 869, on appeal, Id., 44. N.J.Eq. 282, 18 A. 58; Wheeler v. Whipple, 44. N.J.Eq. 141, 14 A. 275, on appeal, Id., 45 N.J.Eq. 367, 19 A. 621; Elkinton v. Brick, 44 N.J.Eq. 154, 15 A. 391, 1. L.R.A. 161; ......
  • In Re Neuman's Estate.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • June 24, 1943
    ...227, 21 A. 333; In re Tunisan's Will, 83 N.J.Eq. 277, 90 A. 695; In re Strang's Will, 109 N.J.Eq. 523, 158 A. 489; Wheeler v. Whipple, 44 N.J.Eq. 141, 14 A. 275, affirmed 45 N.J.Eq. 367, 19 A. 621. The burden of proving undue influence rests on him who alleges it. In re Strang's Will, supra......
  • Ginter v. Ginter
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • April 10, 1909
    ...... preparation or execution of the will, or even knew of its. existence and contents until some time after it had been. made." ( Wheeler v. Whipple, 44 N.J.Eq. 141,. syllabus, 14 A. 275.). . . "The. evidence as to undue influence is not sufficient to justify a. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT