Porschet v. Porschet
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 14 — WILL APPEAL PROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT. The paper in contest was procured by the undue influence of the appellee, and the jury should have so decided, even if the true relation which existed between the parties had been known to the testator at the time of its execution.
Read the full summary
Case 14 — WILL APPEAL PROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT. The paper in contest was procured by the undue influence of the appellee, and the jury should have so decided, even if the true relation which existed between the parties had been known to the testator at the time of its execution. The simple fact that the testator bore an unlawful relation to appellee cre- ' ates the presumption of undue influence on her part, and the jury should have been so instructed. •(Redfleld on Wills, vol. 1, 352, 529; 21 Ga., 552; Dean v. Negley, 41 Pa. St. Rep., 312.) If, as is claimed by appellants, the influence…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PRYOR
delivered the opinion oe the court.
The will in controversy was admitted to probate by the county court as the last will of John L. Porschet, • and, on an appeal to the circuit court, the same result followed, and from the judgment in that court the brother of the testator, who is the only party contesting the validity of that paper, has appealed to this •court.
*95The testimony in the case leaves no doubt as to the mental capacity of the testator to create such a paper, and the ground relied on for defeating the probate is the alleged undue influence of the devisee in procuring the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Main v. RyderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
3Cited by4 opinions
- Stewart v. LyonsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1903
- Johnson v. StiversCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1893
- Palmer v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925
- Rough v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1954