Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISPUTE OVER WILL

ESTATE OF SPINSTER NEPHEW GIVES EVIDENCE CASE FOR PLAINTIFFS {Per Press Association,) CHIUSTCTIURCIL last night. Further evidence was given in the Supreme Court to-day during the hearing of the application to have probate of" the will allegedly made by the late Elizabeth Smith revoked and the will declared . null and void. The plaintii'ls are Olive Judge and Ivy Cookson, both of Ghristchurch, and the defendant is the 'Guardian Trust and Executors Company of New Zealand, Limited.

Mr. H. F. O'Lcary, K.C., opening the case for the plaintiffs, submitted that there were circumstances about the making of the will such as to excite the suspicions of the court. First, the order was made in respect of the testatrix under the Aged and Infirm Persons Act, six months before the will was made and she was. the subject of the order at the. time the will was made. Secondly, section 25 of the Act provided for the confirmation of the will of such a person by a court. Thirdly, ho independent instructions were given by Miss Smith to her solicitors. Fourthly, the instructions for the will came from Harris, who represented the Guardian Trust Company, which benefited immediately and in perpetuity under the will. "I do stress at this stage," said Mr. O'Lcary, "that there was a great want of care in the preparation of the will. The solicitor concerned should himself have taken the matter in hand. He should have had a medical examination made and should have goiie to the court under section 26 of the Act.

The first witness for the plaintiffs was William Sidney Smith, artist, Sumner, nephew of the 'testatrix. He said he had known .Miss Smith for about 60 years. For 20 years he visited her every week, and, for the last three years, once a mouth. He bad seen his aunt dressed in filthy rags in strange contrast to her younger days, when she was very dainty, neat and clean. Mr. O'Leary: She did not look after herself personally? Witness: No, she was in a shocking state. DELUSION OF POVERTY The witness proceeded that his aunt had had very little education and her memory, in later years, seemed to lie failing fast. Iler speech was disjointed and inclined to be rambling and dreamy. It was utter nonsense to suggest that his aunt formerly had been a good business woman. She seemed to suffer under the delusion that she was jioor.

Recalling references to Harris by the testatrix, the witness said she once had said to the witness: "Harris is collecting dividends on my shares. I lon't know what he is doing with the money, and I don't know where I stand."

Later, Miss Smith said: "Harris wants me to hand my affairs over to him for ail time." The witness said to her: "No, J wouldn't do that."

'Later, said the witness, his aunt -aid that,she had signed a paper. Iler account of it was rambling, but sh.< said that something had happened "in camera."

She said to the witness: "The judge asked me if I understood what .1 was doing and I said yes."

The witness had asked her why she said this when she had not understood and she replied: "The judge was so nice. I couldn't say no." NO IDEA OF ESTATE

Before the will was made, the testatrix said to the witness: “Harris is worrying me about a will. I don't know what to do. What will happen if 1 don’t?” The witness had answered that, without a will, her money would probably go to relatives, and she appeared to be satisfied with this probability. After the will was made, the witness gathered that she was not satisfied. The witness said lie was sure his aunt had no idea of the extent of her estate.

Ivy Cookson, on;; of the plaintiffs said that she received £IOO under tlx will. The cheque she received she re turned to the Guardian Trust Com uiiay. Accumulation.' in hev auir '

louse were chiefly rubbish, skins, bits of bread, bottle caps, pieces of rag string and paper and very dirty Handkerchiefs. '

The witness, who visited the house frequently, never saw a fire there, winter or summer. On one occasion, Miss Smith said: "I did't want to make a will, but Mr. Harris wanted me to."

Mr. Barrowclough (for the defence): Did she complain about Mr. Harris?— Witness: She said he bossed her. The witness added that Miss Smith had said, referring to Harris: "He thought it was his money." The court adjourned until to-mor-row.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBH19361008.2.123

Bibliographic details

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19140, 8 October 1936, Page 11

Word Count
761

DISPUTE OVER WILL Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19140, 8 October 1936, Page 11

DISPUTE OVER WILL Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19140, 8 October 1936, Page 11