In Re Estate of Jones
44 Tenn. App. 323, 314 S.W.2d 39, 1957 Tenn. App. LEXIS 159 (1957)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A pre-existing, valid signature of a testator on a piece of paper is sufficient to satisfy the signature requirement for a holographic will subsequently written entirely in the testator's handwriting on that same paper. The law does not require the signature and the body of the will to be written at the same time.
Facts:
- On March 7, 1932, Maude Hall Jones executed a formal, witnessed will, signing her full name, 'Maude Hall Jones,' at the bottom of a sheet of paper.
- At a later, unspecified date, Jones revoked this witnessed will but retained the last sheet of paper which contained her signature.
- Sometime after January 26, 1952, on that same sheet of paper, Jones wrote a new will entirely in her own handwriting, positioned directly below her 1932 signature.
- The new holographic text stated that she wanted Loretta Hall Jones to have everything she owned and referenced bank accounts, including one held jointly by 'Maude & Loretta'.
- After Maude Hall Jones's death, this document was found among her valuable papers.
Procedural Posture:
- Loretta Hall Jones filed a petition in the Probate Court of Shelby County to have an alleged holographic will of Maude Hall Jones admitted to probate.
- The Probate Judge found that all statutory requirements for a holographic will had been met, except for the signature.
- The Probate Judge ruled that the signature 'Maude Hall Jones', written in 1932 for a previous will, could not serve as the signature for the holographic will written after 1952, and denied the petition to probate the will.
- Loretta Hall Jones, the petitioner, appealed the Probate Court's order directly to the Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Western Section.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a testator's pre-existing valid signature on a piece of paper satisfy the statutory signature requirement for a holographic will later written by the testator on that same paper?
Opinions:
Majority - Avery, P. J.
Yes. A pre-existing valid signature can satisfy the statutory requirement for a holographic will subsequently written on the same document. The applicable statute, T.C.A. Sec. 32-105, requires only that the signature and all material provisions be in the handwriting of the testator; it imposes no requirement that they be written contemporaneously. The court reasoned by analogy to witnessed wills, where a testator may acknowledge a pre-existing signature to witnesses. Here, the court stated that the body of the holographic will, being entirely in the testator's handwriting, serves to authenticate the pre-existing signature as convincingly as if the testator had acknowledged it before witnesses. Furthermore, the court noted that the personal pronoun 'I' in the first sentence of the will ('I have nothing much to leave...') logically refers back to the name 'Maude Hall Jones' appearing directly above it, confirming the testator's intent to treat the name as her signature for the holographic instrument.
Analysis:
This decision liberalizes the formal requirements for executing a holographic will in Tennessee by prioritizing the testator's intent over strict temporal formalities. It establishes the precedent that the signature and the body of a holographic will need not be created at the same time, thereby rejecting a rigid, formalistic application of the statute. By analogizing the authentication of a holographic will to the acknowledgment of a signature for a witnessed will, the court aligns the two types of wills more closely and emphasizes that the primary purpose of the requirements is to ensure authenticity and testamentary intent, which were clearly present in this case.
