Boll v. Strand
South Dakota Supreme Court
¡Appeal froml 'Circuit Court, Minnehaha County. Hon. Louis L. FcEEGER, Judge. In the Matter of the Estate of Margretha Boll, deceased. The county court, in a contest by plaintiffs John, Wiliam and Henry Boll, sons and heirs of decedent, admitted the will to probate.
Read the full summary
¡Appeal froml 'Circuit Court, Minnehaha County. Hon. Louis L. FcEEGER, Judge. In the Matter of the Estate of Margretha Boll, deceased. The county court, in a contest by plaintiffs John, Wiliam and Henry Boll, sons and heirs of decedent, admitted the will to probate. Upon appeal by contestants to circuit court, judgment was rendered adjudging the will invalid and void; from which judgment, and from an order denying a new trial, the proponents and heirs, Celia Strand and Amanda Heide, and John C. Mundt, as executor tinder the will, appeal. (1) To point one of the opinion, Appellants cited: In…
1Opinion of the CourtWhiting, J.
[1,2] The record discloses no evidence whatsoever warranting the submission of the question of undue influence and duress to the jury; but the instruction submitting *244same was not excepted to, and therefore the cause cannot be reversed because the court gave same. Was the deceased mentally ■competent to make a will?. Respondents seem to be of the view that this case presents questions analogous to those in Johnson v. Shaver, 172 N. W. 676. In this they are mistaken. There is absolutely no proof of hallucinations nor proof of anything indicating continual mental incapacity on the part of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Johnson v. ShaverSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1919
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gillette v. McLaughlinSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1921
- John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. BehrSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940