Foye v. King

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Foye v. King

165 N.E.2d 748, 340 Mass. 787

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedApril 4, 1960

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 165 N.E.2d 748 (Foye v. King) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Foye v. King, 165 N.E.2d 748, 340 Mass. 787 (Mass. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying jury issues affirmed. This is an appeal from an order denying a motion by contestants of the will of Dolores Mendez Francis, late of New Bedford, for the trial by jury of the issues whether (1) the will was legally executed, (2) the testatrix was of sound mind, and (3) the instrument was procured by the fraud and undue influence of the proponent, Anna K. Foye. Statements by counsel of expected evidence fail to show adequate ground for a reasonable expectation of a result favorable to the contestants. Spilios v. Bouras, 337 Mass. 176, 177, and cases cited. There was no evidence of improper execution and no medical evidence of unsound mind. While the proponent was made residuary legatee, it was as trustee for her daughter and the claim of undue influence was based on mere suspicion, surmise and conjecture. Neill v. Brackett, 234 Mass. 367, 370. Cummins v. McCawley, 241 Mass. 427, 430. Johnson v. Loring, 267 Mass. 310, 312. O’Brien v. Collins, 315 Mass. 429, 439-440.

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

Order denying jury issues affirmed. This is an appeal from an order denying a motion by contestants of the will of Dolores Mendez Francis, late of New Bedford, for the trial by jury of the issues whether (1) the will was legally executed, (2) the testatrix was of sound mind, and (3) the instrument was procured by the fraud and undue influence of the proponent, Anna K. Foye. Statements by counsel of expected evidence fail to show adequate ground for a reasonable expectation of a result favorable to the contestants. Spilios v. Bouras, 337 Mass. 176, 177, and cases cited. There was no evidence of improper execution and no medical evidence of unsound mind. While the proponent was made residuary legatee, it was as trustee for her daughter and the claim of undue influence was based on mere suspicion, surmise and conjecture. Neill v. Brackett, 234 Mass. 367, 370. Cummins v. McCawley, 241 Mass. 427, 430. Johnson v. Loring, 267 Mass. 310, 312. O’Brien v. Collins, 315 Mass. 429, 439-440.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 N.E.2d 748, 340 Mass. 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foye-v-king-mass-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack