Estate of Perkins
Estate of Perkins, 195 Cal. 699 (1925)
Winning Party
Irving E. Bigelow, Jr.
Key Issue
Will Contest
Case Type
PROBATE
Summary
In the case of Bigelow v. Perkins, the California Supreme Court reversed a jury verdict that had found the decedent, Clara Anna Perkins, to be of unsound mind and subject to undue influence when executing her will. The court determined that the contestants failed to provide sufficient evidence of mental incompetency or undue influence at the time of the will's execution, noting the absence of any pressure that could have affected Perkins' decision-making. Consequently, the judgment was reversed in favor of Irving E. Bigelow, Jr., the proponent of the will.
Explore this Case with AI
Ask about this case, find precedent, analyze legal issues, or draft provisions. Powered by all precedential U.S. cases (10M+)
No credit card required
Facts
•
Perkins left a will devising specific amounts to her sister, two brothers, nieces, a church, friends, and the residue to Irving E. Bigelow, Jr.
•
Perkins suffered from aneurism, chronic neuritis, and chronic Bright's disease.
•
Mattie Belle Fink and Benjamin M. Bentley contested the will, alleging unsound mind and undue influence.
•
The will was signed by a mark instead of the signature of the testatrix.
•
Bigelow met Perkins while stationed at a balloon school in Arcadia, California.
•
Clara Anna Perkins died on October 26, 1922, at age 56, with an estate of approximately $57,000.
•
A jury found that Perkins was of unsound mind and subject to undue influence at the time of making the will.
Key Holdings
•
The contestants failed to sustain the burden of establishing that the testatrix was of unsound mind at the time of the execution of the will.
•
There was no evidence of undue influence brought to bear upon the testatrix at the time the will was made.
Citations
Estate of Perkins, 195 Cal. 699, 235 P. 45, 1925 Cal. LEXIS 408 (1925)
Legal Reasoning
The court found that the contestants failed to prove that the testatrix was of unsound mind at the time of the will's execution or that undue influence was exerted. The evidence of mental distress and hallucinations was insufficient to establish mental incompetency or a direct influence on the testamentary act. The court also noted the existence of a prior holographic will with a similar disposition. The court found no evidence of pressure overpowering the testatrix's mind at the time of the will's execution.
Outcome
The judgment was reversed.
Want to Learn More About StrongSuit?
StrongSuit has advanced legal AI tools for deep insights & comprehensive analysis
No credit card required
Copyright 2026 StrongSuit AI, Inc. | All Rights Reserved