In re the Estate of Wood
Before: Sawyer
Synopsis
Appeal from the Probate Court of Sierra County.
On the 27th day of May, 1868, Robert C. Beatie petitioned he Probate Court of Sierra County to admit to probate the instrument hereafter mentioned, as the last will and testament of H. F. Wood, deceased. Alfred Wood, a brother oí deceased, filed his written objections to the probate of the will. On the trial the testimony of the subscribing witnesses was to the effect that on the 5th day of February, 1863, the testator, H. F. Wood, was in San Francisco, at the American Exchange Hotel, and in the publieoffice of the hotel signed the instrument, and requested S. H. Seymour and William H. Ladd to witness the same. H. F. Wood was at that time about to go to Mexico to engage in mining. There was no evidence to show how Wood intended the instrument to be understood, except the language of the same. The Probate Court found the following facts:
1st. That said Henry F. Wood, now deceased, did on the 5th day of February, A. D. 1863, at the City of San Francisco, in the State of California, sign with his own proper hand the following written instrument, viz:
“ I wish five thousand dollars to go to John C. Cole in the event of my dying intestate, and the balance of my property to be held by Kobert C. Beatie, to be disposed of by him as his judgment may dictate. H. E. WOOD.
“San Francisco, Cal., February 5th, 1863.
“ Witness: S. H. Seymour, Wm. H. Ladd.
“ Warrensville, Lycoming Co., Penn. 53 years of age.”
2d. That at the time said TI. F. Wood subscribed said instrument he requested S. IT. Seymour and William H. Ladd to sign said instrument as subscribing witnesses thereto; and the said S. IT. Seymour and William IT. Ladd, did, then and there, upon said request, and in the presence of said IT. F. Wood, sign the same as subscribing witnesses, and that the said S. H. Seymour, and the said William IT. Ladd, were each at the time of such signing above the age of twenty-one years, and competent' and credible witnesses; but it does not appear from the evidence that said witnesses knew the contents of said instrument, or heard it read.
3d. That at the time said IT. F. Wood signed the said instrument he was above the age of eighteen years, to wit: between thirty and forty years old, and that he was of sound and disposing mind and memory, and not under any restraint, undue influence, or fraudulent misrepresentations.
4th. That said H. F. Wood died in Sierra County, on or about the 4th day of March, A. D. 1868, leaving property, both real aiyi personal, in said county, and that at the time of his death he was a resident of said Sierra County.
5th. That the estate of the deceased, H. F. Wood, is* and was at the time of his death of the value of fourteen thousand dollars and upwards.
By the Court, Sawyer, C. J. : This is an appeal from the judgment of the Probate Court of Sierra County, refusing to admit to probate the following instrument, claimed to be the last will and testament of F. H. Wood, deceased, viz:
[80]“I wish five thousand dollars to go to John C. Cole, in the event of my dying intestate, and the balance of my property to be held by Robert C. Beatie, to be disposed of by him as his judgment may dictate.
H. F. WOOD.
“ San Francisco, Cal., February 5th, 1863.
“ Witness: S. H. Seymour, Wm. H. Ladd.”
The only question is, whether this is a will or not. The execution of it is satisfactorily proved, and found by the Probate Court.
After carefully considering the able argument of respondent’s counsel, we are satisfied that the instrument, upon its face, is testamentary in its character, and must be construed to-be a will. It clearly fills the definition of a will given by approved writers on"that branch of the law, viz: “the declaration of a man’s mind as to the manner in which he would have his property or estate disposed of after death.” (1 Jarman on Wills, 1. See, also, 1 Redf. on Wills, 5, Sec. 2.)
This instrument certainly declares the mind of the deceased as to the manner in which he would have his property disposed of, in case he should die after the execution of the instrument, without any other or further manifestation of his wishes. Suppose he had died within twenty-four hours after the execution of this instrument, without any change in his circumstances, or any other manifestation of his desires with respect to his property, could it be for a moment plausibly contended that the document thus executed would not express his mind and intentions as to what disposition should be made of his property? To so hold would be to assert that he drew up, signed, and called two persons to witness the execution of this instrument, in the mode prescribed by law, for no purpose whatever. He must have intended from the transaction to accomplish something. We are not authorized to suppose he designed to do a' void act. The instrument shows what disposition the deceased intended to make of his property, and this disposition was not to take effect till after his death. The only possible embarrassment
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)