189 Pa. 338 | Pa. | 1899
Opinion by
The contention of mental unsoundness of the testator was entirely unsupported by any testimony, and was abandoned on the argument. As to the averment of undue influence in the procurement of the will, we have not been referred to any testimony in support of the allegation. After having read the testimony relating to the making and execution of the will with care and patience, we fail to discover any evidence whatever tending to sustain the averment. The testimony showed without any contradiction that the attending physicians, anticipating an early dissolution of the testator, advised that if he had any final arrangements to make respecting his affairs, he had better attend to it without delay. In consequence of this the testator requested Dr. Davis, one of the physicians, to tell D. A. Gorman to come down and write his will. The doctor delivered the message to Mr. Gorman who did come to the house and wrote the will now in contest, on the same evening. According to the testimony of Gorman the testator explained at length the property he owned, and the manner in which he directed it to be disposed of, stating specifically the amount of each legacy he intended to give, and concluding with a direction that he desired the residue of the estate to be given to his three brothers in equal shares. All of this Gorman says he wrote on a slip of paper to be used by him in drawing out the full body of the will. This paper he preserved with the will in the same envelope and, upon being compared with that instrument, the two papers are seen to correspond precisely, so far as the figures are concerned which Gorman testified were inserted in the will when he wrote it and when it was signed by the testator. As to this paper and the testimony of Gor
There is no question as to the execution of the will. If some of the legacies were tampered with and changed without the testator’s knowledge, the amount of those legacies would be called in question on the distribution, but the will would stand as to all others. We will not decide that question now, as the parties interested are not all before us, and it is no part of the matter that is before us.
We are of opinion that the learned court below was clearly right in refusing the issue. The assignments of error are dismissed.
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.