THE HUNTER WILL CASE

Hawera Star, Volume L, 19 December 1930, Page 4

THE HUNTER WILL CASE

wirvoiws .case cO-Ycuudkt>

FURTHER MEDICAL EVIDENCE. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Dec. 18. The tease dn which Lady Hunter is opposing probate of the will of Sir George .Hunter, questioning the testamentary capacity of the testator, was continued) in the Supremo Court to-day. Dr. Twhigg said that .providing his affairs were noit too intricate and that lie had some assistance it was possible 'Sir George could have made a will within itwo weeks of his stroke. There were no definite tests for testamentary 'Ciapacitv laid down as far 'as witness knew. * One judged cases on general lines and it was usual to satisfy oneself as to a patient's soundness of .mind. Where ‘there was extensive paralysis due to apoplexy there was usually general mental impairment, (but not always. It was possible to have a paralysis ease that- had nothing to do with the brain. There had been nothing in the history of Sir George's ease that gave him the impression that the stroke had been severe. This .concluded plaintiff's case. IMr Watson, in his address, said Lady Iluniter had l decided to talc© the present action only after full inquiries, had been made from people who were f V thought to be competent to say Sir' George had had no testamentary capacity. Drs. iS/teele and .Giesen, the attending doctor and consulting doctor respectively, and as a result of a long interview with them, and the evidence 1 would show that ialt the time both Dr. iSteefl) and Dr. iGiesen were emphatic that Sir George ait no time beffore his departure for Rotorua had had any testamentary .capacity. Included in Dr. Giesen ’s evidence would ibe certain evidence dealing with Dr. Steele's .previous action's and utterances as to Sir George's testamentary 'capacity. Lady Hunter as a result of the evidence gained at this conference hiad decided to .contest the granting of probate. Her attitude in contesting the will's did hot arise from any complaint of her treatment; she had taken action for the interest and benefit of her child Bettyj His Honour: But the child takes nothing under the 1924 will! Mr Watson: Ultimately she will take everything. She has a reversionary interest.

His Honour: She gets nothing in the meantime. Lady Hunlter is a young woman and the girl takes no interest till her death or her re-marriage. It is a very different position under the last wilL Mr Watson said Lady iHuniter was trying .to ensure that the wishes of Sir George, made before his illness, would be given effect to. She had hadi northing to do with the October will and had entirely disapproved of the will in the making at that time. His Honour: Gan you point out any unfairness in the October will? Mr Watson: In 'its unexplained and sudden. cutting dawn of Ifche child's interests. Mr Watson proceeded to compare the provisions made for the child in the three wills and went on to say thalt it was suggested that the estate was not worth the value ilt was said to hiave until all the annuities had come back into the estate on the deaths of the people to whom they were paid, thus making the annuity fund available for the estate. lif it was a fact that there would be no income from the estate until the annuities and other charges had fallen back in the residue, then counsel contended the child was mot a whit better off under the 19129 will than under -the 1924 will, on which Lady Hunter asked for the court's pronoun cement.