Estate of Unruh

CourtMontana Supreme Court
DecidedJune 30, 1983
Docket83-046
StatusPublished

This text of Estate of Unruh (Estate of Unruh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Estate of Unruh, (Mo. 1983).

Opinion

NO. 93-46

I N THC SUFREbE COURT OF THE STATE OF YONTANA

ILJ TEE 3iATTER OF TEE ESTATE OF

AUGUST UiJRUH, Deceased.

Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Seventh J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County o f Dawson, The H o n o r a b l e L. C . G u l b r a n d s o n , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g .

C o u n s e l o f Record:

For Appellant:

William B. Sherman, Conrad, Montana

For R e s p o n d e n t : @ + mi ; . n & m ! && - G l e n d i v e , P40ntana 'LC%{ 5 ;m c n t c n / p ~ ,

S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : Xay 2 6 , 1 9 8 3 Decided: June 30, 1983

~iled: JUN 3 0 1983

Clerk Mr. J u s t i c e J o h n Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n of the Court.

This appeal comes from the District Court of the Seventh J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , County of Dawson. W a r e asked t o review an e

o r d e r d e n y i n g p r o b a t e of c e r t a i n p a p e r s a l l e g e d t o c o n s t i t u t e a

holographic w i l l . A u g u s t Unruh d i e d i n February 1981. After h i s death, his

d e c e a s e d w i f e ' s b r o t h e r , Raymond J o h n s o n , found an e n v e l o p e among

h i s personal belongings. The e n v e l o p e was s e a l e d and c o n t a i n e d four pieces of paper. On t h e o u t s i d e of the envelope, these

words were w r i t t e n ; "names and a d d r e s s e s of t h o s e t o be named i n

- my w i l l . " Under these words the signature of August Unruh appears. On e a c h of t h e f o u r p i e c e s of p a p e r , v a r i o u s names and addresses are l i s t e d . I t i s a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e r e a r e two l i s t s ;

o n e l i s t c o n t a i n i n g names and a d d r e s s e s of Mr. U n r u h ' s s i d e of t h e family, and t h e o t h e r c o n t a i n i n g names and a d d r e s s e s of h i s

w i f e ' s s i d e of t h e f a m i l y . On A u g u s t 9 , 1 9 8 2 , Raymond J o h n s o n f i l e d a n amended a p p l i c a - tion for formal probate of will and appointment of personal representative. I n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n , Mr. J o h n s o n s t a t e d t h a t he

had b e e n u n a b l e t o l o c a t e a f o r m a l l y e x e c u t e d w i l l and t h e r e f o r e h e r e q u e s t e d t h e c o u r t t o e n t e r an o r d e r a l l o w i n g p r o b a t e of t h e e n v e l o p e and t h e accompanying f o u r p i e c e s of p a p e r . A hearing

was h e l d after which the court entered its order denying the application. W e affirm.

Appellant contends that the writings met the statutory r e q u i r e m e n t s of a h o l o g r a p h i c w i l l , and any q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n i n g Mr. Unruh's intent could be proved by oral evidence. A

holographic w i l l i s one t h a t f a i l s t o meet t h e f o r m a l r e q u i r e -

ments of section 72-2-302, MCA. A writing "is valid as a h o l o g r a p h i c w i l l , whether o r not w i t n e s s e d , i f t h e s i g n a t u r e and

t h e m a t e r i a l p r o v i s i o n s a r e i n t h e h a n d w r i t i n g of t h e t e s t a t o r . "

S e c t i o n 72-2-303, MCA. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r e w e r e s i m p l y no t e s t a m e n t a r y p r o v i s i o n s . W agree. e The p a p e r s a r e o n l y l i s t s of v a r i o u s i n d i v i d u a l s . A w i l l i s an " i n s t r u m e n t

by which a p e r s o n makes a d i s p o s i t i o n of h i s property, . . . a

l e g a l d e c l a r a t i o n of a m a n ' s i n t e n t i o n , which he w i l l s t o be p e r -

formed after h i s death. . ." B a l l e n t i n e s Law D i c t i o n a r y , 1371

(3rd Ed. 1969). Here there is no disposition of property.

Appellant also argues that testimony from p e o p l e who knew Mr.

Unruh should have been admitted to show that he intended all

those persons listed to share equally. However, a valid will

must exist before it can be construed or interpreted. In Re

Estate of Gudmunsen (1976), 1 6 9 Mont. 53, 5 4 5 P.2d 146. The

e n v e l o p e and t h e f o u r p a p e r s do n o t c o n s t i t u t e a v a l i d w i l l .

The judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s a f f i r m e d .

W e concur:

Ph-4 4qpcAdlccQJJ Chief ~ u s t i c e "

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Estate of Unruh, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estate-of-unruh-mont-1983.