Legal Opinion

Couch v. Gentry

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided December 22, 1892PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Appeal from Ray Circuit Court. — Hon. Jas. M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The validity of a will is tested by the condition of the testator’s mind, or his freedom from force or coercion at the time of its execution, and remote fragmentary acts, expressions or circumstances not directly or indirectly tending to establish mental incapacity or undue influence when the will was made should be excluded.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Ray Circuit Court. — Hon. Jas. M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The validity of a will is tested by the condition of the testator’s mind, or his freedom from force or coercion at the time of its execution, and remote fragmentary acts, expressions or circumstances not directly or indirectly tending to establish mental incapacity or undue influence when the will was made should be excluded. Schouler on Wills [2 Ed.] sec. 232; 1 Redfield on Wills [3 Ed.] ch. 10, sec. 38, subdivs. 16, 33; Beach on Wills, sec. 107; Ketchum v. Stearns, 8 Mo. App. 66; Jones v. Roberts, 37 Mo. App. 163; Ketchum v.…

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

This was a suit to contest the will of Benjamin B. Gentry on the grounds of mental incapacity and undue influence exerted by the wife and some of the children of the testator. Yerdict against the will.

The testator had three daughters by his first marriage, namely, Susan McBee, May Patton and Nancy Couch. The plaintiffs are the children, of Mrs. Couch. The other daughters by the first marriage are made the defendants, but in interest they stand on the side of the plaintiffs. The father married the second time in 1860. Two or three years after that the girls before mentioned married, and from…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jackson v. HardinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
  2. Thompson v. IshSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
  3. Benoist v. MurrinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
  4. Brinkman v. RueggesickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
  5. Norton v. PaxtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Pulitzer v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
  2. Berkemeier v. RellerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1927
  3. Ditton v. HartIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Maddox v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
  5. St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railroad v. St. Louis Union Stock Yards Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API