ESTATE OF DONOVAN

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 13089 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O MONTANA F F 1976 I N THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF ETHA W N T DONOVAN, a l s o known a s A EA Waneta Donovan, E. W. Donovan, and Mrs. Waneta Donovan, Deceased. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e Ninth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable R. D. M c P h i l l i p s , Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel o f Record : For Appellant : Robert Hurly a r g u e d , Glasgow, Montana F o r Respondent: Sherman and Anderson, Conrad, Montana Douglas Anderson a r g u e d , Conrad, Montana Submitted: Decided : February 4, 1976 FEB 2 4 1976 r . Suscicc Frank L. '-laswell d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t . T h i s i s a n a p p e a l from an o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Toole Zounty, t h e Hon. R. D. ? l c P h i l l i p s , d i s t r i c t j u d g e , d e n y i n g a c l a i m t o j e w e l r y a l l e g e d l y p a s s i n g under a w i l l . A p p e l l a n t i s V i o l a R i o r d a n , a l e g a t e e under t h e w i l l oi .h"lrs. Etha Waneta Donovan, d e c e a s e d . Respondent i s B e r n i c e ~ a h Lutz, e x e c u t r i x of t h e e s t a t e . l Mrs. Donovan, a r e s i d e n t o f T o o l e County, d i e d on J u n e 1-2, I 9 7 3 l e a v i n g a w i l l t h a t s h e p e r s o n a l l y d r a f t e d d a t e d May 2 9 , 1973. Her e s t a t e i s a p p r a i s e d i n e x c e s s of $340,000 and p a s s e s co numerous f r i e n d s and r e l a t i v e s under t h e terms o f h e r w i l l . The d i s p u t e i n t h i s c a s e r e v o l v e s around t h e d i s p o s i t i o n or Y r s . 9onovan1s diamond engagement and wedding r i n g s e t , two diamond d i n n e r r i n g s , a m u l t i s t o n e r i n g , a diamond b r o o c h , a s i n g l e diamond e a r r i n g and a g e n t l e m a n ' s diamond r i n g . jewelry i s valued a t approximately $8,700. M r s . This Donovan a l s o p o s s e s s e d costume j e w e l r y a p p r a i s e d a t $100 t h a t p a s s e d under h e r will. P a r a g r a p h e i g h t of h e r w i l l p r o v i d e d : "EIGHTH: I h e r e b y g i v e , d e v i s e and b e q u e a t h t o V i o l a Riordan f i v e thousand d o l l a r s ( $ 5 , 0 0 0 ) , m y sewing t a b l e . Z e n i t h Color T e l e v i s i o n s e t . t h r e e p i e c e s of w h i t e Samsonite l u g g a g e , costum;! j e w e l r y , c u t g l a s s v a s e and p i t c h e r , a l l m p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s and y y c l o t h e s . I n t h e s a f e t y d e p o s i t box m s i l v e r d o l l a r s . Also t o s a i d V i o l a R i o r d a n , I g i v e , d e v i s e and b e q u e a t h a l l m r i g h t , t i t l e and i n t e r e s t i n t h e o i l and g a s y r o y a l t i e s and m i n e r a l i n t e r e s t s which I own on c e r t a i n l a n d s i n Toole and G l a c i e r C o u n t i e s , Montana. I I (Emphasis added) . Paragraph t w e l v e o f t h e w i l l a u t h o r i z e s t h e e x e c u t r i x t o s e l l a l l of t h e p r o p e r t y t h a t was n o t bequeathed o r d e v i s e d elsewhere i n t h e w i l l . O November 1 6 , 1973, t h e e x e c u t r i x p e t i t i o n e d t h e n d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h e j e w e l r y was n o t p a r t o f t h e " p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s 1 ' d e s c r i b e d i n p a r a g r a p h e i g h t and t h a t i t s h o u l d be s o l d pursuant t o paragraph twelve of t h e w i l l . Implicit i n t h i s p e t i t i o n i s t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e jewelry was n o t bequeathed under t h e words "costume jewelry". A o r d e r t o show c a u s e why t h e n jewelry should n o t be s o l d was i s s u e d on November 17, 1973. O n December 4 , 1973, a p p e l l a n t o b j e c t e d t o t h e proposed s a l e contending t h e jewelry was given t o h e r by paragraph e i g h t of t h e w i l l . Then, on December 6 , 1973, t h e e x e c u t r i x f i l e d a s an e x h i b i t an envelope found i n Mrs. ~ o n o v a n ' s s a f e t y d e p o s i t box c o n t a i n i n g t h e diamond gentleman's r i n g , t h a t a p p e l l a n t contends i s one of t h e p i e c e s of jewelry l e f t t o h e r . Mrs. Donovan had w r i t t e n a n o t e on t h e envelope s t a t i n g t h a t t h e r i n g was t o be given t o Brian Lenz, when he reached 21 y e a r s of age. The e x e c u t r i x p e t i t i o n e d t h e c o u r t t o determine whether t h i s r i n g should be d i s t r i b u t e d t o Brian Lenz a s a p r e c a t o r y g i f t . Appellant o b j e c t e d and prayed t h a t t h e g i f t be found void. O May 1 3 , 1975, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e g i f t n t o Brian Lenz f a i l e d f o r l a c k of a d e l i v e r y which would complete The c o u r t a l s o found M r s . Donovan d i d n o t i n t e n d t o the g i f t . g r a n t a p p e l l a n t t h e jewelry b u t i n s t e a d intended t o d i s p o s e of i t by s a l e under paragraph twelve of h e r w i l l . The c o u r t i s s u e d an o r d e r f o r t h e s a l e of t h e jewelry from which t h i s a p p e a l i s taken. The i s s u e f o r review i s whether t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t was c o r r e c t i n determining t h a t t h e 7testa.trix- d i d n o t i n t e n d t o bequeath h e r jewelry t o a p p e l l a n t . The c r u x of t h i s c a s e i s t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n determining what t h e t e s t a t r i x meant by t h e words "costume jewelry" and " a l l m personal effects". y Since t h e w i l l took e f f e c t p r i o r t o t h e adoption of t h e Montana Uniform Probate Code, t h e s t a t u t e s i n e f f e c t a t t h a t time govern t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h i s w i l l . Matter o f t h e E s t a t e of Gudmunsen, 33 %.Rep. 57. Mont ,-3 P. - 2d In the -> S e c t i o n 91-201, R.C.M. 1947, provided: "A w i l l i s t o be construed according t o t h e intention of the testator.9~ * *" Section 91-202, R.C.M. 1947, provided: II I n t e n t i o n t o b e a s c e r t a i n e d from w i l l . I n c a s e s of u n c e r t a i n t y a r i s i n g upon t h e f a c e of a w i l l , a s t o t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of any of i t s p r o v i s i o n s . t h e t e s t a t o r f s i n t e n t i o n i s t o b e - a s c e r t a i n e d from t h e words of t h e w i l 1 , t a k i n g i n t o view t h e circums t a n c e s under which i t was made. e x c l u s i v e of h i s o r a l declarations (Emphasis added. ) * . Words used i n a . w i l - 1 a r e t o be taken i n t h e i r o r d i n a r y and grammatical s e n s e , u n l e s s t h e r e i s a c l e a r i n t e n t i o n t o g i v e them a n o t h e r meaning. S e c t i o n 91-208, R.C.M. 1947. The d e f i n i t i o n of costume jewelry, given i n W e b s t e r l s Third New I n t e r n a t i o n a l D i c t i o n a r y , 1971, p. 515, i s : 1I Jewelry f o r wear w i t h c u r r e n t f a s h i o n s usu. made o f inexpensive m a t e r i a l s ( a s metal, s h e l l s , p l a s t i c s , wood) o f t e n s e t w i t h i m i t a t i o n o r semiprecious s t o n e s . 11 W hold t h e jewelry i n q u e s t i o n i s n o t costume jewelry. e I t i s valued a t approximately $8,700 and fashioned of expensive and p r e c i o u s m a t e r i a l s . W f u r t h e r hold t h e words "costume e jewelry1' were intended t o pass only t h e $100 worth o f costume jewelry t o a p p e l l a n t i n accordance w i t h t h e d e f i n i t i o n quoted above, and n o t t h e more v a l u a b l e p i e c e s . The maxim "expressio unius e s t e x c l u s i o a l t e r i u s " ( t h e e x p r e s s i o n of one t h i n g i m p l i e s t h e e x c l u s i o n of a n o t h e r ) f u r t h e r supports t h i s construction. This r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n has been expressed i n t h i s language i n lack's Law D i c t i o n a r y , Revised Fourth E d i t i o n , 1968, p. 692: I IWhen c e r t a i n persons o r t h i n g s a r e s p e c i f i e d i n a law. c o n t r a c t . o r w i l l . an i n t e n t i o n t o exclude a l l o t h e r s 'from i t s ' o p e r a t i o n may be inferred. II The express mention of "costume jewelry1' i n d i c a t e s t h a t Mrs. Donovan d i d n o t i n t e n d t o i n c l u d e h e r expensive j e w e l r y i n h e r bequest t o a p p e l l a n t . The attempted g i f t o f t h e gentleman's r i n g t o Brian Lenz i s a f u r t h e r circumstance supporting t h i s con- struction. Even chough t h e attempted g i f t d c c u r r e d p r i o r ro r h e d r a f t i n g o f t h e w i l l , i t n o n e t h e l e s s d e m o n s t r a t e s Mrs. Donovan's usage o f t h e terms i n v o l v e d . Next w e d e t e r m i n e whether t h e j e w e l r y was bequeathed i n t h e phrase " a l l m p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s " . y Appellant contends t h a t t h e p h r a s e i s g e n e r a l i n scope and encompasses t h e j e w e l r y . W find, e however, u n d e r t h e d o c t r i n e o f ejusdem g e n e r i s , t h a t t h e g e n e r a l i t y of t h e p h r a s e i n and of i t s e l f d e f e a t s t h i s argument. Generis i s a r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n . Ejusdem I n A l e k s i c h v. I n d u s t r i a l Acc. Fund, 116 Mont. 1 2 7 , 1 3 9 , 1 5 1 ~ 4 0 1 6 , h i s Court s t a t e d : t "The d o c t r i n e o f ejusdem g e n e r i s i s a w e l l known r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n t o a i d i n a s c e r t a i n i n g t h e meaning o f s t a t u t e s and o t h e r w r i t t e n i n s t r u m e n t s , t h e d o c t r i n e b e i n g t h a t where a n enumeration o f s p e c i f i c t h i n g s i s f o l l o w e d by some more g e n e r a l word o r p h r a s e , s u c h general phrase i s t o be held t o r e f e r t o t h i n g s of t h e same k i n d a s t h o s e enumerated. I I Under t h i s r u l e o f c o n s t r u c t i o n t h e meaning o f " a l l m p e r s o n a l y e f f e c t s " must be r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e same c l a s s o f goods s p e c i f i c a l l y enumerated i n p a r a g r a p h e i g h t of t h e w i l l , 841; 80 Am J u r 2d, W i l l s , §§ 1136,1255. Anno. 30 ALR3d 797, The p h r a s e r e f e r s o n l y t o i t e m s o f costume j e w e l r y and c a n n o t b e expanded t o i n c l u d e the t e s t a t r i x ' s more e x p e n s i v e j e w e l r y which i s o f a d i f f e r e n t type o r c l a s s . A p p e l l a n t a s s e r t s t h e b e q u e s t of p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s means nothing i f i t does n o t include t h i s jewelry. This contention i s without merit a s t h e typesof personal e f f e c t s r e f e r r e d t o a r e t h o s e s p e c i f i c a l l y enumerated i n p a r a g r a p h e i g h t o f t h e w i l l . I n I n r e s i l v e r ' s E s t a t e , 98 Mont. 1 4 1 , 150, 38 P.2d 277, t h i s Court s t a t e d : "When a w i l l c o n t e s t i s i n s t i t u t e d , t h e c o n t e s t a n t assumes t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e p l a i n t i f f i n a c i v i l a c t i o n , and t h e burden r e s t s upon him t o e s t a b l i s h t h e f a c t s which h e a l l e g e s w i l l w a r r a n t t h e s e t t i n g a s i d e of t h e i n t e n t i o n of t h e t e s t a t o r , o r t h e d e c l a r a t i o n t h a t t h e i n s t r u m e n t c h a l l e n g e d does n o t e x p r e s s t h a t i n t e n t i o n , by a preponderance o f t h e e v i d e n c e . 11 I f t h e c o n t e s t a n t f a i l s t o meet t h i s burden by producing evidence t o support h i s a l l e g a t i o n s , t h e c o u r t must r u l e a g a i n s t him even i f h i s opponent has produced no evidence whatsoever. The s o l e concern of t h e t r i a l judge a t t h i s p o i n t i s t h e s t r e n g t h o r weakness of t h e c o n t e s t a n t ' s c a s e . 1 anc croft's Probate P r a c t i c e , 2d ed. $205, pp. 494,495. Although t h e i n s t a n t c a s e i s n o t a w i l l c o n t e s t i n t h e s t r i c t s e n s e of t h e term, i t i s a c o n f l i c t between t h e e x e c u t r i x of t h e w i l l a t t e m p t i n g t o c a r r y o u t i t s p r o v i s i o n s and a n o t h e r . A s such t h e same r u l e a p p l i e s and t h e burden of proof i s on appellant. A t the d i s t r i c t court level appellant f a i l e d t o p r e s e n t any e x p e r t testimony o r evidence t h a t would support h e r c o n t e n t i o n t h a t "costume j ewelryl' i n c l u d e s expensive jewelry w i t h precious stones. N d i r e c t evidence was o f f e r e d t o show t h a t Mrs. o Donovan intended t o bequeath h e r jewelry t o a p p e l l a n t . Appellant d i d n o t meet h e r burden of proof and t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t had no a l t e r n a t i v e but t o r u l e against her. The o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s affirmed. f Justice W Concur: e m Justices. g/ e'

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.