Wolf v. Harris

106 P. 1016, 57 Or. 276, 1910 Ore. LEXIS 42
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 1910
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 106 P. 1016 (Wolf v. Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wolf v. Harris, 106 P. 1016, 57 Or. 276, 1910 Ore. LEXIS 42 (Or. 1910).

Opinions

Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from the decree of the circuit court of Wasco County, setting aside and declaring void a deed made by one B. Wolf to the defendant Esther Harris.

1. The testimony is voluminous and in many respects contradictory, but, we think, establishes clearly that the deed in question was procured by fraud and undue influence on the part of the grantee. The evidence satisfies us that, at the time of the execution of this instrument, the decedent, B. Wolf, was old, sick from an incurable disease, broken in mind and body from the excessive use of stimulants, and that he was therefore incapable of realizing the nature and quality of the transaction which resulted in his affixing his signature to the instrument in question, which purported to convey the great bulk of his property to the defendant, Esther Harris, to the exclusion of her brother and sister, whose claims were as great, or greater, than her own. The evidence shows that upon B. Wolf’s recovery, or partial recovery, he treated the property as his own, and made a will bequeathing it and the income therefrom, just as any other owner of property might have done under the same circumstances, and we do not believe that he ever realized that he had conveyed it away.

These being our conclusions, it is needless to incumber the next volume of Oregon Reports with a discussion of the testimony in detail. We are of the opinion that the [278]*278findings of the circuit court are in accordance with the testimony, and its decree is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

In Re Estate of Meier
224 P.2d 572 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1950)
Crabb v. Watts
249 F. 357 (D. Oregon, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
106 P. 1016, 57 Or. 276, 1910 Ore. LEXIS 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolf-v-harris-or-1910.