In 1954, the Supreme Court of Arizona issued the opinion In re Walter’s Estate, 77 Ariz. 122, 267 P.2d 896 (1954). Despite being written over 70 years ago, the opinion still holds valuable insights today about how we determine if someone has testamentary capacity.
The Facts
On October, 14, 1951, Elias Walters was working on his ranch in Wilcox, Arizona, when his hand and arm were trapped in a hay baler. This terrible accident, caused his hand to be stuck in the machinery for at least an hour. A neighbor discovered Elias and called a doctor to help extricate him. His hand emerged crushed and mangled. Elias was taken to the hospital and given painkillers including morphine and demerol.
An hour after arriving at the hospital Elias asked about making the will. A lawyer was not available, but an hospital superintendent wrote a will out for Elias while Elias dictated. The superintendent read it back out to Elias and he signed with his left hand. Four nurses witnessed the execution of the will and three of them signed the will as witnesses. A friend later hired an attorney to draw up a more formal will. By the time the attorney drafted it, Elias was too weak to understand or sign the instrument. Elias died the next day, on October 15th.
The Contents Of The Will
Elias executed left the majority of the estate to one of his three children, John. He left bequests of one hundred dollars each to his other two children Laura and Walter. He also left a bequest of one hundred dollars to his ex-wife, Katherine. The will went to probate and Laura and Walter contested on the grounds that Elias did not have testamentary capacity.
It went to trial and the jury found that Elias was not of sound mind when he executed his will. It was appealed up to the Arizona Supreme Court.
What is Testamentary Capacity?
In order to execute a valid will, a testator must have a certain level of mental competence. What that level is varies slightly from state to state. In Arizona, the elements of testamentary capacity are: ability to know the nature and extent of one’s property, ability to know the natural objects of one’s bounty, and ability to understand the nature of the testamentary act. Basically, you need to understand what you have. You need to understand how much of it you have. And, finally, you need to understand the effect that executing a will, will have on the disposition of your property.
You also don’t have to have ongoing testamentary capacity in order to execute a will. The testator only has to have testamentary capacity at the very instant the will was made. If a testator lacks capacity after the execution, even if it is shortly thereafter, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the testator lacked capacity during the creation of the will.
What did the Arizona Supreme Court Say?
The Arizona Supreme Court found that there was not sufficient evidence to show that Elias lacked testamentary capacity. When someone contests a will on the basis of lack of testamentary capacity, the burden is on the contestant to show that the decedent lacked testamentary capacity. In other words, it was on Laura and Walter to show that Elias didn’t have capacity.
An expert witness testified that a hypothetical person who was administered the pain killers Elias had been administered would not have capacity. The Court said that the hypothetical state of a hypothetical person is not enough to show that Elias actually lacked capacity. The Court relied on the testimony from the neighbor, doctor, and hospital staff who were actually there. They all stated that Elias was conscious, coherent and rational. They all said he was of sound mind before and during the creation and execution of the will.
Laura and Walter argued that shortly after executing the will, Elias told hospital staff that he had no family, demonstrating that he was not of sound mind. The Court found that the will named each of his family members, showing that at the time of his will, he remembered them. The Court also found that, although his competency waned over the next several hours, Elias seemed to have capacity during the creation and while signing the will.
The Lesson?
There are a couple of lessons I think we can take away from this case. The first, is that a health crisis does not necessarily equate to lack of capacity. Just because someone has a diagnosis, has been through a traumatic event, or is in the hospital, doesn’t mean that they don’t have capacity to execute a will. If you’re not sure if a loved one has capacity though, it would be best to get them to an estate planning attorney to make that determination. A good estate planning attorney should be able to determine whether a person has capacity to execute documents and won’t draft for them if they don’t.
An even better solution is to estate plan before the crisis occurs. I get it. No one wants to think about dying or their estate plan. We all put things off. But, if you wait until an emergency strikes to create your estate plan, you are asking for contests and legal battles. The Walter family likely would have been saved a lot of time, money and heartache is Elias had executed a will prior to his tragedy.
