Haman v. Preston
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Clayton District Court. — A. N. Hobson, Judge. Action brought after the will of Dorothea Oorts was admitted to probate, to set aside Item 10 thereof, upon the ground of undue influence inducing the execution thereof. There was a verdict in favor of plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtStevens, J.
It is the claim of plaintiffs that the defendant W. A. Preston, who wrote the will and signed same as a witness, was, at the time and long prior thereto, the attorney and confidential adviser of testatrix, and that he, by undue influence, induced her to execute Item 10 thereof, naming his wife as sole residuary legatee. These allega*1294tions present the only issue of fact submitted to the jury.
One of the principal grounds relied upon by appellants for reversal is that the verdict is not supported by, and is contrary to, the evidence; but, before proceeding to a discussion of this contention, we…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Graham v. CourtrightSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Guth v. BellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- Liddle v. SalterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Dutton v. SeeversSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Hull v. MitchellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
- Sewall v. McGovernWyoming Supreme Court · 1922
- In Re Estate of AnkenySupreme Court of Iowa · 1947
- In Re Estate of BrooksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940
- Shaw v. DuroSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.