(Download) "Cranston v. Hallock Et Al." by Supreme Court of Minnesota ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Cranston v. Hallock Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of Minnesota
- Release Date : January 30, 1932
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 63 KB
Description
LUMMUS, J. This is an appeal from an order of the Probate Court, denying the motion of the contestants in a will case to frame issues for trial by jury as to soundness of mind and undue influence. G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 215, §Â§ 16, 22. What constitutes unsoundness of mind and undue influence will be found discussed in Marshall v. Cram, 269 Mass. 124, 168 N.E. 521, and Daly v. Hussey, 275 Mass. 28, 174 N.E. 916, and cases cited. No evidence was taken, but counsel for the parties made statements, which are reported, as to the evidence which they intended to present at a trial. Cook v. Mosher, 243 Mass. 149, 137 N.E. 299, Beal v. Davis, 251 Mass. 175, 146 N.E. 354. Statements in opposition to the motion, as well as in its support, may be considered. McIntosh v. McIntosh, 263 Mass. 315, 160 N.E. 814; Taylor v. Callahan, 265 Mass. 582, 164 N.E. 445; Swift v. Charest, 268 Mass. 47, 167 N.E. 250; Bacigalupo v. Cuneo, 277 Mass. 474, 178 N.E. 623. The question before us is whether, upon the statements of counsel, there appears to be a real and true question of fact to be tried supported by evidence of a substantial nature (Fuller v. Sylvia, 240 Mass. 49, 53, 133 N.E. 384, 386, Sheppard v. Olney, 271 Mass. 424, 171 N.E. 447), giving ground for a reasonable expectation of a result favorable to the party requesting the framing of issues. Johnson v. Loring, 267 Mass. 310, 311, 166 N.E. 622, 623. On this question, in which there is an element of discretion. Weight is to be attributed to the decision of the probate Judge, even though this court has before it everything that was before him. Bemis v. Andrews (Mass.) 182 N.E. 816, 817.