Home/Wyoming Supreme Court/Seeley v. in Re the Estate of Seeley

Seeley v. in Re the Estate of Seeley

627 P.2d 1357, 1981 Wyo. LEXIS 335
CourtWyoming Supreme Court
DecidedMay 6, 1981
Docket5442
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 627 P.2d 1357 (Seeley v. in Re the Estate of Seeley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Seeley v. in Re the Estate of Seeley, 627 P.2d 1357, 1981 Wyo. LEXIS 335 (Wyo. 1981).

Opinions

RAPER, Justice.

This appeal involves a will contest. After proceedings to probate a will had been commenced, appellants petitioned the district court to deny admission to probate of a holographic will on various grounds. This petition was amended to include a challenge [1358]*1358based upon the discovery that the will had, subsequent- to its publication, been altered by physically cutting out a paragraph. Following a trial, the trial judge denied the petition to set aside the will, and judgment was entered accordingly.

Appellants set out the issues to be:

1. “A handwritten document cannot remain a valid will after having a bequest physically cut out, and the remaining pieces taped together, because of the execution requirements for a valid holographic will.”
2. “The presumption that the decedent intended to revoke the handwritten document as her will was not rebutted by the evidence.”
3. “There was no republication or revival of the handwritten document as decedent’s will.”

The appellee believes that the “issues” as presented by appellants are argument and sets them out to really be:

1. “Is a valid holographic will revoked by the testator’s act of physically cutting out a provision in the will and thereafter taping the remaining portions together?”
2. “Is there evidence to support the probate court’s finding that the deletion and removal of the paragraph by the testator was not done with the intention to revoke the will?”

We will affirm.

The facts are not in dispute, so we will borrow heavily from the language of counsel appearing in their briefs. Hazel M. See-ley had six children. Three of her children were daughters, Arlene Tenke, Darlene Speidel and Donna Blackburn, who were named as the principal beneficiaries under the disputed will. Her three male children were Tommy Seeley, Ted Seeley and David Seeley. In 1975 David Seeley predeceased his mother, leaving two sons, Vernon and Leonard, surviving.

On or about December 28, 1977, Hazel M. Seeley, the decedent, went to the Sundance State Bank accompanied by her daughter, Ms. Darlene Speidel. Ms. Seeley went to the office of Richard Durfee, the president of the bank, and requested him to witness the signing of a document. He called a bank employee, Norma Peterson, into the room and together they saw Ms. Seeley sign a document, which they then signed as witnesses. Mr. Durfee made three copies, after which Ms. Seeley placed the original document in her handbag and left. Mr. Durfee placed a copy in his files. It is not clear from the record what happened to the third copy. But the executed will was entirely in the handwriting of the decedent, except for the signatures of the witnesses. The following is a reproduction of the photocopy kept by Mr. Durfee:

[1359]*1359

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

Related

Smith v. State
714 P.2d 1201 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1986)
M & M WELDING, INC. v. Pavlicek
713 P.2d 236 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1986)
Matter of Estate of Dobson
708 P.2d 422 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1985)
Shanor v. Engineering, Inc. of Wyoming
705 P.2d 858 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1985)
Stockton v. Sowerwine
690 P.2d 1202 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1984)
Pike v. Markman
633 P.2d 944 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1981)
Seeley v. in Re the Estate of Seeley
627 P.2d 1357 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
627 P.2d 1357, 1981 Wyo. LEXIS 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seeley-v-in-re-the-estate-of-seeley-wyo-1981.