Estate of Jett

California Court of Appeal Apr 17, 1962 No. Civ. No. 25860Published

Before: Fourt

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment admitting a lost holographic will to probate, finding that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's findings regarding the will's existence and subsequent loss.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish the existence of a holographic will.
Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish that the will was lost or not in existence at the time of the testatrix's death.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Suffice it to say, however, that there is competent testimony and evidence in the record to support and maintain each finding made by the judge and the findings support the judgment.”

“Our reading of the reporter's transcript leaves no doubt that the evidence is amply sufficient to support the judgment in this case.”

202 Cal.App.2d 459 (1962) Estate of DARLENE E. JETT, Deceased. WILLIE PLOUNT et al., Contestants and Appellants,

ELODEAN TENZER, Defendant and Respondent.

Civ. No. 25860. California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. One.

Apr. 17, 1962. Harry V. Leppek and Wallace J. Manley for Contestants and Appellants. [460]

Morton B. Harper and Cyril Moss for Defendant and Respondent.

FOURT, J.

This is an appeal by the contestants from a judgment which in effect admitted a lost holographic will to probate and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.

Darlene E. Jett, known by several different names (hereinafter referred to as the decedent or testatrix), died on January 4, 1960. She had been married and divorced; however she had no children. There were seven brothers and four sisters, the contestants being the seven brothers and three sisters. The proponent of the will is Elodean Tenzer, a daughter of Celeste Goldman, the noncontesting sister of decedent. Under the lost will the entire estate went to a minor son of Elodean Tenzer.

After a trial before the court without a jury a judgment was ordered which admitted the lost holographic will to probate. A motion for a new trial was denied.

There was evidence which, if believed, established that decedent did in her own handwriting in the presence of two persons (Elodean Tenzer and Celeste Goldman) entirely write, date and sign a will on March 23, 1954. [fn. 1] Decedent furthermore read the will aloud to each of the persons present and then apparently gave it for safekeeping to Celeste Goldman, one of the persons present. There seemingly is no question but that the testatrix on the date and at the time of the making of the will was of sound and disposing mind and not acting under duress, menace, fraud or undue influence, and in every respect was competent by will to dispose of her estate. It was also established by competent evidence that the will was in existence at the time of the death of the testatrix and subsequently was lost or destroyed. The testimony of the two witnesses above mentioned (Tenzer and Goldman) in considerable part was bolstered by two disinterested witnesses.

Estate of Jett

AI Brief

FOURT, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOTES

AI Brief