Estate of Janes

California Supreme Court Aug 27, 1941 No. L. A. No. 17219Published

Before: Traynor

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a properly executed holographic will, complete on its face, should be admitted to probate even if labeled a 'copy' by the testator, provided there is no evidence of an intent to revoke the instrument.

Issues

Whether a notation labeling a holographic will as a 'copy' is sufficient to establish a lack of testamentary intent.
Whether the failure to find an 'original' will creates a presumption of revocation that prevents the probate of a duplicate instrument.
Whether extrinsic evidence is admissible to show that a document appearing to be a will was not intended to be effective as such.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A will that is complete and valid on its face should not be denied probate except upon the presentation of convincing proof that it was executed without testamentary intent.”

“If valid duplicate wills are executed, either may be probated if there is no evidence indicating that the missing copy was destroyed with intent to revoke”

18 Cal.2d 512 (1941) Estate of HARRY C. JANES, Deceased. IVA A. VROOM, Appellant,

DOROTHY LEE JANES CURTISS, Respondent.

L. A. No. 17219. Supreme Court of California. In Bank.

Aug. 27, 1941. S. S. Hahn and W. O. Graf for Appellant.

Leo V. Youngworth and J. Harold Decker for Respondent.

TRAYNOR, J.

This appeal is from an order of the superior court denying a petition for the probate of a document alleged to be the last will and testament of Harry C. Janes. The decedent died on December 9, 1938, in the county of Los [514] Angeles at the age of 66 years. After his death appellant, a chiropractor who had been attending him professionally for several years, found the purported will in a suitcase belonging to him. The instrument on its face is a valid holographic will. Attached to the instrument, however, is a slip of paper, unsigned and undated, on which appears in decedent's handwriting: "This is a copy of my last Will, the original is in my safe deposit box." No other will was found in decedent's safe deposit box or among his effects.

The will offered for probate is dated November 1, 1938, and contains a bequest of $5000 and two automobiles to the appellant. The residue of the estate is left to Dorothy Lee Janes Curtiss, the decedent's daughter, who is named executrix. There is evidence that the night before decedent died he told appellant that he was leaving her $5000 and his two cars, and that he insisted that appellant go to his apartment for a suitcase containing the ownership certificates to the automobiles and instructions as to what should be done after his death. Appellant found in the suitcase the purported will, as well as decedent's life insurance policy, a draft for $250 to be filled out and sent to his daughter, the ownership certificates to the automobiles, instructions concerning his funeral and the disposition of his body, and an authorization to appellant to take charge of his personal effects.

The trial court, finding that the purported will was not decedent's last will and testament and that he died intestate, denied the petition for probate.

Estate of Janes

AI Brief

L. A. No. 17219. Supreme Court of California. In Bank.

TRAYNOR, J.

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief