Marshall wrote a will and then
died. The will left almost everything to some relatives and some charitable
organizations, but only a few dollars to his one surviving daughter,
Barnes.
Barnes challenged the will on
the basis that Marshall was not of sound mind and did not have the
requisite mental capacity when he executed the will.
Based on the testimony,
Marshall was clearly crazy.
But, does being generally
crazy mean that you lack testamentary capacity to execute a will?
The Trial Court agreed that
Marshall was not of sound mind and invalidated the will. The
beneficiaries of the will appealed.
The beneficiaries argued
that Marshall wasn't crazy, he just had, "peculiarities,
eccentricities, and unusual moral views, which are not evidence of testamentary
incapacity or an unsound mind."
The Missouri Supreme Court
affirmed.
In a dissent, it was argued
that he understood what he was doing, since he specifically mentioned his
heirs by name, and disposed of all of his possessions. He just chose to
do it in a way that most people wouldn't agree with.
The legal standard for testamentary
capacity:
You must understand the
objects of your bounty.
aka who should get your
$$$.
You must understand the
extent of your bounty.
aka how much $$$ you have
to give.
You must understand the
uniqueness of a will.
You must be able to
interrelate these three facts.
