ANATOMY OF A WILL CONTEST: PROVING LACK OF TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY
September 14, 2010 § 6 Comments
Before the contestants in a will contest may proceed, the proponents of the will must first establish their position that the will is valid.
In Estate of Holmes, 961 So.2d 674, 679 (Miss. 2007), the Mississippi Supreme Court stated:
The proponents of the will meet their burden of proof by the offering and receipt of the will into evidence and the record of probate. [Citation omitted] The proponents make a prima facie case solely on this proof. Id. The burden then shifts to the contestants to overcome the prima facie case, but the burden of proof remains with the proponents to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the testator had capacity. Id.
The proponents typically make a prima facie case by admitting into evidence the will, the witness affidavits, the order granting letters testamentary, and the letters testamentary.
In order to determine testamentary capacity, the trial court must consider three factors:
- Whether the testator had the ability at the time of making his will to understand the nature and effect of his acts.
- Whether the testator had the ability at the time of making his will to understand the natural objects or persons to receive his bounty and their relation to him; and
- Whether the testator was capable of determining at the time of making the will what disposition he desired to make of his property. Estate of Holmes, Id.
“In considering all the evidence, some testimony will receive greater weight. The testimony of subscribing witnesses receives greater weight than the testimony of witnesses who were not present at the will’s execution … The date of execution is the most important date, given that we recognize that a testator may not possess capacity one day and within several days have the capacity to execute a valid will.” Rocco v. Sims, 918 So.2d 864, 871-872 (Miss. App. 2005).
The same capacity that is required to make a valid deed is required the for making a valid will. Whitworth v. Kines, 604 So.2d 225, 228 (Miss. 1992). Since the party seeking to set aside a deed must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the grantor lacked mental capacity at the time of execution, and not simply that the grantor suffered general weakness. In re Conservatorship of Cook, 937 So.2d 467, 470 (Miss. App. 2006), it would follow that the same standard of proof would apply to a case in which the party seeks to set aside a will on the same basis.
The Better Chancery Practice Blog 
[…] Will contests: Lack of testamentary capacity. […]
[…] We’ve talked here before about the onerous burden that the plaintiff bears to convince the trial court that a will, deed, or other instrument should be set aside for undue influence. We also talked about the proof necessary to prove lack of testamentary capacity. […]
[…] Lack of mental capacity to make a deed or will must be proven by the challenger’s clear and convincing evidence, although the proponenet of a will needs to prove capacity only by a preponderance. […]
Thanks for the simple checklists!
[…] Will contests: Lack of testamentary capacity. […]
[…] OF A WILL CONTEST II: PROVING UNDUE INFLUENCE We already took a look at testamentary capacity here. This post deals with the other pole of the will contest: undue […]