Shiels v. Shiels
1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1198, 109 S.W.2d 1112 (1937)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An instrument's validity as a will depends on the maker's testamentary intent at the time of execution. When extrinsic evidence about the circumstances surrounding the signing raises a legitimate doubt about that intent, the question becomes an issue of fact for a jury to decide.
Facts:
- In 1911, Ernest Shiels was a candidate in a class of approximately 150 men being initiated into the Scottish Rite of the Masonic Order.
- During the ceremony, a committee chairman informed the candidates that each was required to make a will on the spot to continue with the initiation.
- Candidates were informed that anyone who refused to make a will would be dismissed from the class.
- They were also told that after the ceremonies were complete, they could withdraw, destroy, or revoke the will.
- Ernest Shiels initially protested, stating he did not want to make a will and had nothing to bequeath.
- After being reassured he could later revoke it, Shiels filled out a pre-printed form, writing that all his property should go to his mother, Charlott Jane Shiels.
- Shiels signed the document, which was witnessed by two 32nd-degree Masons, and he died in 1934.
Procedural Posture:
- Charlott Jane Shiels, the deceased's mother, filed an application to probate a purported will in the county court of Hunt County.
- Alice M. Shiels, the deceased's wife, contested the application.
- The county court, acting as the court of first instance for probate, entered an order admitting the instrument to probate.
- The contestant, Alice M. Shiels, appealed the order to the Sixty-Second judicial district court of Hunt County for a new trial.
- At the conclusion of the jury trial in the district court, the judge peremptorily instructed the jury to return a verdict for the proponent, Charlott Jane Shiels.
- The district court entered judgment probating the will, and the contestant, Alice M. Shiels, appealed that judgment to the Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.
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 evidence showing that an individual executed a formally correct will only after protesting and being told it was a mandatory, revocable part of a secret society's initiation ceremony raise a question of fact for the jury as to the existence of testamentary intent?
Opinions:
Majority - Johnson, Chief Justice
Yes. Evidence that a formally correct will was executed under circumstances that cast doubt on the maker's purpose raises a question of fact for the jury regarding testamentary intent. An instrument is not a valid will, regardless of its form, unless the maker executed it with the present intention that it operate as a testamentary disposition of property. The court reasoned that facts and circumstances surrounding a will's execution are admissible to determine the maker's true intent. In this case, Shiels's initial protest, the compulsory nature of the act as part of a ceremony, and the assurance that the will could be revoked, all 'becloud its purpose' and create sufficient doubt for a jury to reasonably conclude he lacked genuine testamentary intent. Citing Brackenridge v. Roberts, the court affirmed that where evidence of intent is not conclusive, the issue must be determined by the jury, not by the judge as a matter of law.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the primacy of testamentary intent over mere formalism in the law of wills. It clarifies that a facially valid will can be successfully challenged if extrinsic evidence suggests it was executed for a purpose other than disposing of property, such as fulfilling a ceremonial requirement. By holding that such evidence creates a question of fact for the jury, the court prevents judges from summarily probating wills made under ambiguous or coercive circumstances. The ruling empowers contestants to look beyond the four corners of the document and introduce evidence about the context of its creation, making the determination of a will's validity a more holistic inquiry.
