Wheeler v. Wade

1935 OK 584, 45 P.2d 66, 172 Okla. 365, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 261
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMay 21, 1935
DocketNo. 25337.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 1935 OK 584 (Wheeler v. Wade) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wheeler v. Wade, 1935 OK 584, 45 P.2d 66, 172 Okla. 365, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 261 (Okla. 1935).

Opinion

CORN, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the district court of Pontotoc county, denying the contest, after probate, of the last will and testament of George Wade, full-blood Chickasaw Indian. On January 3, 1933, the county court of Pontotoc county admitted the will in question to probate. On April 8, 1933, James Wheeler, individually, and Crable Wheeler, Rolie Wheeler, and Melvin Wheeler, minors, by their guardian, W. L. Wheeler, filed their petition of contest of said will after probate. An answer and response was duly filed to said petition by the principal legatees and by the administrator with will annexed. The county court, after hearing the evidence presented upon the issues, denied the contest, sustained the will, and admitted it to probate. The contestants thereupon appealed to the district court, which court, upon a trial de novo, on the 7th day of October, 1933, overruled and denied the contest, after probate, of said will of the deceased. The contestants appeal to this court.

The parties will be referred to as they appeared in the trial court.

The material facts as disclosed by the record are in part, as follows; That on December 8, 1932, George Wade, a full-blood Chickasaw Indian, died in Pontotoc county, seized and possessed of an estate of certain lands and of approximately $100,000 deposited with the Indian department. George Wade was an elderly man who could not speak the English language very well. About S :30, p. m. on October 4, 1930, George Wade, now deceased, signed the instrument purporting to be his will. There was named in such will as his principal legatee, his wife, Minnie Wade, and his two sons, George Wade, Jr., and Clarence Wade, and to his grandchildren, the plaintiffs, he bequeathed the sum of $25 each. The plaintiffs are the children of Eliza Wade Wheeler, a deceased daughter of the testator. On the 3rd day of October, 1930, George Wade, the testator, suffering from excessive drinking, was admitted to Breco’s Hospital at Ada, where he was confined until the 12th day of October. The hospital charts disclose that drugs were administered to him from the time he was received to the last day he was there.

On the 4th day of October, George Wade, Jr., and Clarence Wade and Bill Leslie went to the office of Brunson & Kemp, *366 attorneys in the city of Ada, for the purpose of having a will prepared for the aged father of George Wade, Jr., and Clarence Wade.

All of the information which the attorneys received with reference to the preparation of the will of the testator was obtained exclusively from these parties. After the will was prepared it was delivered to one of the parties, who took it to the hospital, where it was signed by mark and signature. After its execution the. will was deposited in the office of the court clerk of Pontotoc county. The will in question contains no unusual provisions and names George Wade, Jr., executor. All the property of the testator, both real and personal, is devised and bequeathed to Minnie Wade, George Wade, Jr., and Clarence Wade, except the sum of $25 to each of the plaintiffs.

The testator died on the 8th day of December, 1932, and on the 14th' day of December, 1932, the will was presented for probate. On the 23rd day of December, 1932, the plaintiffs filed their contest of will before probate. Thereupon, a1 purported agreement was entered into between the principal legatees and contestants, as settlement of the matter of contest. The terms of the purported agreement were that the children of the deceased daughter of the testator should participate in the estate to the extent of approximately one-fourtli thereof, except as to certain personal property and some land.

On the 3rd day of January, 1933, the petition for the probate of the will came on for hearing, and during this hearing the contestants withdrew their contest of the probate of the will, and the county court entered its order admitting the will to probate.

The attempted settlement between the heirs was never consummated, .and on the 8th day of April, 1933, these plaintiffs filed their verified petition of contest after probate. One of the grounds of contest is that fz-aud was perpetrated upon them in that the principal legatees allured them in believing that they would be permitted to participate in the estate to the extent of an undivided one fourth interest after the will was probated; however, after the time to appeal therefrom had expired, the major legatees refused, as disclosed by the evidence, to carry out the agreement. Responses were filed, and on the issues framed the matter .was tried. The county court denied the contest, and the contestants appealed to the district court, which denied the contest. Three of the contestants are minors.

The first question which presents itself for consideration is whether or not the petition of contest contains allegations to give the court jurisdiction to hear the matters so presented.

Section 1110, O. S. 1931, prescribes the necessary allegations of a petition to contest a will after probate. Bearing in mind that three of the contestants are minors, and that section 1110, supra, must be construed with section 1116, O. S. 1931, as decided in the case of Scott et al. v. McGirth, 41 Okla. 520, 139 P. 519, an examination of the petition discloses that it complies with the requirements of the foregoing statute, and is sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the court.

The plaintiffs argue in their brief that the testator was not competent to make a will and that the same was obtained by duress, coercion, undue influence, and fraud.

Dr. Breco, referring to the testator’s condition on the date of the execution of the will, testified that George Wade had been given so znuch morphine, strychnine, azid other drugs that his mind was clear only at intervals. The rest of the time he was so doped that his mind could not grasp anything.

Clarence Wade, son of the testator, testified that his father was in a normal condition when he signed and put his thumb mark on the will, and that he did not in any way seek to influence his father against his will or judgment as to the disposition he should make of his property.

John Williamson and Cudahy Allison, the subscribing witnesses, both testified that they and Clarence Wade were present when the will was read to George Wade at the Breco’s Hospital; that at that time Mr. Wade was in a normal condition, and signed the instrument which he declared to be his last will and testament, which they witnessed and signed at his request and in his presence.

In addition to the facts above set forth, the record discloses that Tal Crawford, county judge, two days after the will was executed, and after it had been presezited to him, took the same and went to the hospital and had a talk with the deceased wherein he explained to said deceased the terms of the will, and that he was requested by George Wade to file the same. Under the record in this ease, it discloses that the testator on the day, the will was executed *367 was in a stupor or sleepy condition on account of drugs administered to liim by the doctor or hospital attendants, as shown by a part of the doctor's testimony, and at times to be in a normal condition, as disclosed by another portion of the doctor’s testimony.

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

Related

Winn v. Dolezal
355 P.2d 859 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1960)
Hatcher v. Wade's Estate
1937 OK 521 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1937)
Alarcon v. Dick
1936 OK 599 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1935 OK 584, 45 P.2d 66, 172 Okla. 365, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wheeler-v-wade-okla-1935.