MATTER OF LATRAY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 14669 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1979 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF GRACE LaTRAY Appeal from: District Court of the Tenth Judicial District, 'r , Judge presiding. Honorable Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Robert L.Stephens, Jr., Billings, Montana For Respondent: Robert L. Johnson, Lewistown, Montana - Submitted on briefs: Decided: June 29, 1979 13 17 99 Mr. J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n of t h e C o u r t . his i s a n a p p e a l by t h e c o n t e s t a n t s o f a w i l l o f Grace LaTray from two i n t e r r e l a t e d o r d e r s of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e T e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , F e r g u s County, t h e Honorable Ronald D. M c P h i l l i p s p r e s i d i n g . Appellants o b j e c t t o find- i n g s of f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s o f law and a n o r d e r d e c l a r i n g t h a t t h e d e c e a s e d w a s c o m p e t e n t and e x e c u t e d a v a l i d w i l l on November 26, 1977, naming T r a v i s J a y n e s as h e r p e r s o n a l representative. They a l s o o b j e c t t o a s e c o n d o r d e r a p p o i n t - i n g Travis Jaynes a s successor personal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i n t h e e s t a t e o f J o e LaTray, Grace L a T r a y ' s d e c e a s e d husband, f o r t h e e s t a t e o f whom s h e was p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e up u n t i l her death. Grace LaTray, a l i f e t i m e r e s i d e n t o f F e r g u s County, d i e d i n Lewistown, Montana, on J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1978, a t t h e a g e o f 79. H e r husband, J o e LaTray, had d i e d t h e p r e v i o u s y e a r , and a t t h e t i m e o f h e r d e a t h Grace LaTray was s e r v i n g a s personal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of h e r husband's e s t a t e . Decedent was s u r v i v e d by t h r e e n a t u r a l c h i l d r e n : Leonard LaTray, L e s l i e LaTray and Thelma LaTray F o r d y c e , appellants herein. I n addition t o her three natural chil- d r e n , t h e r e were s i x o r p h a n e d c h i l d r e n o f two d e c e a s e d d a u g h t e r s , a l l o f whom s h e and h e r d e c e a s e d husband had l e g a l l y adopted. The a d o p t e d g r a n d c h i l d r e n a r e Kenneth P u t r o , J u d y P u t r o Wells, T r a v i s J a y n e s ( r e s p o n d e n t h e r e i n ) , Deanna ( J a y n e s ) Vogl, E d d i e J a y n e s and Vanessa Dawn J a y n e s . During t h e l a s t y e a r s o f h e r l i f e d e c e d e n t was c h r o n i c a l l y ill, h a v i n g s u f f e r e d from a number o f d i f f e r e n t p h y s i c a l a i l m e n t s i n c l u d i n g a s e v e r e s t r o k e s u f f e r e d on September 1 4 , 1977, which r e s u l t e d i n p a r a l y s i s o f h e r l e f t side. By ~ c t o b e r5, 1977, h e r c o n d i t i o n had s t a b i l i z e d , and s h e w a s t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e C e n t r a l Montana N u r s i n g Home i n ~ e w i s t o w n . S u b s e q u e n t l y , on O c t o b e r 11, 1 9 7 7 , a t t h e req u e s t of f a m i l y members, d e c e d e n t w a s t r a n s f e r r e d t o Columbus H o s p i t a l i n G r e a t F a l l s f o r f u r t h e r i n t e n s i v e p h y s i c a l therapy. S h e remained a t Columbus H o s p i t a l u n t i l November 3 , 1977, when s h e was t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e C e n t r a l Montana H o s p i t a l a t Lewistown, Montana. Decedent remained h o s p i - t a l i z e d i n Lewistown u n t i l t h e t i m e o f h e r d e a t h . The w i l l i n q u e s t i o n was e x e c u t e d by t h e d e c e d e n t on November 26, 1977, i n h e r h o s p i t a l room. I t was w i t n e s s e d by C h a r l e s B. Vogl, t h e f u t u r e husband of o n e o f t h e d e c e d e n t ' s a d o p t e d g r a n d c h i l d r e n , Nancy A. Ridgeway, o n e o f t h e h o s p i t a l n u r s e s , a n d R o b e r t L. J o h n s o n , t h e a t t o r n e y o f d e c e d e n t and now f o r T r a v i s J a y n e s , r e s p o n d e n t h e r e i n . On J a n u a r y 2 5 , 1978, t h e w i l l was f i l e d f o r p r o b a t e by r e s p o n d e n t , t h e p r i n c i p a l b e n e f i c i a r y a n d named p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e thereunder. On F e b r u a r y 1 0 , 1978, a p p e l l a n t s b r o u g h t t h i s a c t i o n t o c o n t e s t t h e w i l l b a s e d upon t h e ground o f l a c k o f t e s t a m e n t a r y c a p a c i t y . The m a t t e r was t r i e d b e f o r e t h e c o u r t s i t t i n g w i t h o u t a j u r y on August 2 8 , 1978. On O c t o b e r 25, 1978, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e n t e r e d i t s f i n d i n g s o f f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s o f law and o r d e r a d m i t t i n g t h e w i l l t o probate. I t i s from t h e s e f i n d i n g s , c o n c l u s i o n s and o r d e r t h a t c o n t e s t a n t s appeal. Evidence p r e s e n t e d a t t h e w i l l c o n t e s t i n c l u d e d testimony from d e c e d e n t ' s a t t e n d i n g p h y s i c i a n , D r . E. ~onnall Thomas, who t e s t i f i e d t h a t i n t h e weeks p r e c e d i n g t h e e x e c u t i o n d e c e d e n t was i n c a p a b l e of a b s t r a c t c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n a n d t h a t s h e was p r o n e t o c o n f u s i o n and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n i n dealing with her business a f f a i r s . Thomas i n d i c a t e d , how- e v e r , t h a t d e c e d e n t ' s c o n d i t i o n was improving, and he c h a r a c t e r i z e d h e r m e n t a l a t t i t u d e a s " c h e e r f u l " and " a l e r t " on November 1 6 , 1977, o n l y t e n days b e f o r e t h e e x e c u t i o n of t h e will. There was a l s o t e s t i m o n y of t h e c o n t e s t a n t s h e r e i n i n d i c a t i n g t h a t o n t h e i r v i s i t s w i t h d e c e d e n t i n t h e hosp i t a l t h e y found h e r t o b e d i s o r i e n t e d and behaving i n an e r r a t i c and i n a p p r o p r i a t e manner. The w i t n e s s e s t o t h e w i l l t e s t i f i e d t h a t a t t h e t i m e of e x e c u t i o n d e c e d e n t named h e r r e l a t i v e s , knew t h e n a t u r e and e x t e n t o f h e r p r o p e r t y and u n d e r s t o o d how s h e w a s d i s p o s i n g of i t . Testimony by one of d e c e d e n t ' s a d o p t e d d a u g h t e r s , Judy Wells, c o n c e r n i n g t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e e x e c u t i o n of t h e w i l l was corroborative of t h e a t t e s t i n g witnesses' testimony. The s o l e i s s u e p r e s e n t e d on a p p e a l i s whether t h e r e was s u f f i c i e n t s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e evidence t o support t h e findi n g s and c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t t h a t d e c e d e n t w a s competent a t t h e t i m e of t h e e x e c u t i o n o f t h e w i l l i n q u e s t i o n . On a p p e a l t h i s C o u r t ' s r e v i e w i s l i m i t e d t o whether t h e r e i s s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e judgment. Big Sky L i v e s t o c k , I n c . v . Herzog ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 1 7 1 Mont. 409, 4 1 4 , 558 P.2d 1107, 1 1 1 0 . "We r e v i e w t h e e v i d e n c e i n a l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y , and w e w i l l r e v e r s e o n l y when t h e r e i s a l a c k o f s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e i n t r o d u c e d t o support the results." Mont. , M a t t e r of E s t a t e of Holm ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 588 P.2d 531, 534, 36 St.Rep. 11, 1 4 . " ' S u b s t a n t i a l evidence' i s evidence such ' a s w i l l c o n v i n c e r e a s o n a b l e men and on which such men may n o t r e a s o n a b l y d i f f e r a s t o whether i t establishes the [prevailing party's] case The e v i d e n c e may b e i n h e r e n t l y weak and s t i l l b e deemed ' s u b s t a n t i a l ' and s u b s t a n t i a l e v i dence may c o n f l i c t w i t h o t h e r e v i d e n c e p r e sented." Cameron v . Cameron ( 1 9 7 8 ) , Mont. , 587 P.2d 939, 944, 945, 35 St.Rep. 1723, 1729. . . . p - Respondent p r e s e n t e d t e s t i m o n y from t h e a t t e s t i n g w i t n e s s e s of t h e w i l l i n q u e s t i o n . A l l testified that d e c e d e n t , i n r e s p o n d i n g t o q u e s t i o n s a t t h e t i m e o f execut i o n , named a l l h e r r e l a t i v e s , t h e n a t u r e and e x t e n t o f h e r p r o p e r t y , and t h a t s h e u n d e r s t o o d how s h e was d i s p o s i n g o f it. T h i s t e s t i m o n y was c o r r o b o r a t e d by J u d y Wells, a n a d o p t e d c h i l d of d e c e d e n t , who was p r e s e n t d u r i n g t h e p r e execution interview. Though d e c e d e n t s u f f e r e d from v a r i o u s p h y s i c a l a i l m e n t s and a t t i m e s e x h i b i t e d s i g n s of c o n f u s i o n and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n , t h e above e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e d s h e was n o t c o n f u s e d o r d i s o r i e n t e d on t h e d a y s h e e x e c u t e d t h e w i l l . The e v i d e n c e a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e c o n t e s t e d w i l l i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y s i m i l a r t o a n e a r l i e r d r a f t made i n 1974 when t h e r e was no q u e s t i o n o f competency. W e f i n d t h i s e v i d e n c e meets t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of s u b s t a n - t i a l i t y and i s s u f f i c i e n t t o s u p p o r t t h e c o n c l u s i o n s and o r d e r s of t h e D i s t r i c t Court. The judgment o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s a f f i r m e d . / Justice W e concur: I Chief J u s t i c e I WfLIL f2~~S-y ustices
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.
