In Re the Estate of Mettee

702 P.2d 1381, 237 Kan. 652, 1985 Kan. LEXIS 430
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJuly 26, 1985
Docket56,192
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 702 P.2d 1381 (In Re the Estate of Mettee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re the Estate of Mettee, 702 P.2d 1381, 237 Kan. 652, 1985 Kan. LEXIS 430 (kan 1985).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This is an appeal by the executor and principal beneficiary of the will of Leonard Mettee, deceased, from an order of the Wyandotte District Court denying admission of the will to probate. The Court of Appeals, in a unanimous opinion by Judge Meyer, affirmed. In re Estate of Mettee, 10 Kan. App. 2d 184, 694 P.2d 1325 (1985). We granted the petition of the executor for review because the case involved the execution of a will in triplicate. Upon careful and thorough study of the issues raised, we adopt the opinion of the Court of Appeals and affirm that court and the trial court.

The Court of Appeals opinion contains an accurate statement of the facts. On April 14, 1980, Leonard Mettee executed an original and two photocopies of his will. Each was witnessed, notarized and executed with the testamentary formalities required under Kansas law. See K.S.A. 59-606. The original or “ribbon” copy was known to have been in his possession, but could not be found after his death. The trial court and the Court of Appeals held that the common-law presumption of revocation applied. We last recognized that presumption in In re Estate of Thompson, 226 Kan. 437, 442, 601 P.2d 1105 (1979), a case relied *653 upon by the Court of Appeals. In Thompson, we stated the presumption as follows:

“Where the facts disclose that a will, duly executed, was in the possession of the testator for some time immediately prior to his death and it cannot be found after his death, a rebuttable presumption arises that he did revoke the will or that he destroyed it with the intention of revoking it.” 226 Kan. at 442.

For the reasons stated by the Court of Appeals in its opinion, we conclude that the rule is still applicable in this state, that it has not been revoked by K.S.A. 59-611 or 59-2228, and that if is applicable in cases where two or more duplicate copies of a will are executed with the required formalities and one executed copy is retained by the testator, but cannot be found after his or her death.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals and the trial court is affirmed.

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

Related

Brown v. Vannoster
Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2019
In re P.R.G.
244 P.3d 279 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2010)
Robinson v. WICHITA EMPLOYEES'RET. BD.
241 P.3d 15 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2010)
American General Financial Services, Inc. v. Carter
184 P.3d 273 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2008)
In re the Estate of Roloff
143 P.3d 406 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2006)
In re the Estate of Kasper
887 P.2d 702 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1994)
Matter of Estate of Heeter
831 P.2d 990 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1992)
In re the Estate of Day
753 P.2d 1296 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
702 P.2d 1381, 237 Kan. 652, 1985 Kan. LEXIS 430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-mettee-kan-1985.