Stephen v. Coleman
533 S.W.2d 444, 1976 Tex. App. LEXIS 2428 (1976)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A testator possesses the requisite testamentary capacity to execute a valid will if, at the specific time of execution, they have sufficient mental ability to understand the act of making a will, the effect of the act, the nature and extent of their property, and the natural objects of their bounty, even if they are generally ill or have been deemed incompetent for other purposes.
Facts:
- The testator was diagnosed with a brain tumor and was receiving treatment at a Veterans Administration (VA) hospital.
- On December 11, 1974, the testator's step-son, Bobby Ray Stephen, filed an application to be appointed his guardian, alleging he was incompetent to handle his affairs.
- The testator was given a 4-day Christmas pass from the hospital beginning December 23, 1974.
- During his pass, the testator discovered that Stephen had changed the locks on his house, preventing him from entering.
- On December 26, 1974, the testator went to an attorney's office to discuss the terms of a will.
- On December 27, 1974, the testator returned to the attorney's office, reviewed the will, requested a correction to his mother's name, and executed the will.
- The will left nominal sums of $10.00 each to his step-son and children, with the remainder of his estate bequeathed to his mother, Gracie Hodge.
- The testator died on January 5, 1975.
Procedural Posture:
- Nell Ruth Coleman, the will's proponent, filed an application in the trial court to admit the testator's will to probate.
- Bobby Ray Stephen, the contestant, challenged the will, alleging the testator lacked testamentary capacity.
- After a trial before the court (a bench trial), the trial court found that the testator was of sound mind and admitted the will to probate.
- Bobby Ray Stephen, as appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth.
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 possess the requisite testamentary capacity on the day he executes his will, despite suffering from a serious illness and being subject to a pending guardianship proceeding?
Opinions:
Majority - Spurlock, Justice
Yes, the testator possessed the requisite testamentary capacity. The proper inquiry in a will contest is the condition of the testator’s mind on the specific day the will was executed, not their general state of health. The court found substantial evidence supporting the testator's capacity at the moment of execution. This included testimony from the drafting attorney, Michael Kensel, who stated the testator appeared to have average mental capacity, understood the terms of the will, knew his property, identified his heirs, and even corrected a spelling error. The court held that this direct evidence of a 'lucid interval' outweighed the general evidence of his illness, confusion at other times, and the guardianship proceeding, which was not adjudicated until after the will was signed and thus created no presumption of incapacity at the time of execution.
Analysis:
This decision strongly reaffirms the 'lucid interval' doctrine and the temporal focus of the testamentary capacity inquiry, limiting it to the precise moment of the will's execution. It clarifies that a severe illness or even a subsequent adjudication of incompetence for guardianship does not, by itself, invalidate a will. The case underscores the significant weight courts give to the testimony of disinterested witnesses present at the execution, such as the drafting attorney, in overcoming evidence of a testator's general or periodic cognitive decline. This sets a high evidentiary bar for contestants who must prove incapacity specifically at the time the will was signed, rather than relying solely on the testator's overall medical condition.
