King v. Fuston

Court of Appeals of Oregon

King v. Fuston

936 P.2d 365, 147 Or. App. 238, 1997 Ore. App. LEXIS 418

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedMarch 19, 1997

DocketPR 90-129A; CA A79788

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 936 P.2d 365 (King v. Fuston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

King v. Fuston, 936 P.2d 365, 147 Or. App. 238, 1997 Ore. App. LEXIS 418 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

In this will contest, the issues are whether the decedent had testamentary capacity when he executed a will that left his entire estate to proponent and whether the will was the result of undue influence. The trial court upheld the will. We review de novo. ORS 19.125(3).

The legal principles involved are well established and do not require discussion. We have carefully reviewed the testimony and the exhibits, giving weight where appropriate to the trial court’s opportunity to evaluate the witnesses’ testimony at first hand. We conclude that the decedent had testamentary capacity and that, even if there was an attempt to exercise undue influence over him, that attempt had nothing to do with his decision to leave his estate to proponent. The will was solely the product of decedent’s desires, not of anyone else’s efforts.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

In this will contest, the issues are whether the decedent had testamentary capacity when he executed a will that left his entire estate to proponent and whether the will was the result of undue influence. The trial court upheld the will. We review de novo. ORS 19.125(3).

The legal principles involved are well established and do not require discussion. We have carefully reviewed the testimony and the exhibits, giving weight where appropriate to the trial court’s opportunity to evaluate the witnesses’ testimony at first hand. We conclude that the decedent had testamentary capacity and that, even if there was an attempt to exercise undue influence over him, that attempt had nothing to do with his decision to leave his estate to proponent. The will was solely the product of decedent’s desires, not of anyone else’s efforts.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

936 P.2d 365, 147 Or. App. 238, 1997 Ore. App. LEXIS 418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-fuston-orctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack