Title: ESTATE OF UNRUH

State: montana

Issuer: Montana Supreme Court

Document:

NO. 93-46 I N THC SUFREbE COURT OF THE STATE OF YONTANA 1983 ILJ TEE 3iATTER OF TEE ESTATE OF A U G U S T UiJRUH, Deceased. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Seventh J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County of Dawson, The Honorable L. C. Gulbrandson, Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel of Record: For Appellant: William B. Sherman, Conrad, Montana For Respondent: @ & + m m ! i ; & . & n - Glendive, P40ntana 'LC% { 5 ; m c n t c n / p ~ , Submitted on B r i e f s : Xay 2 6 , 1 9 8 3 Decided: June 3 0 , 1 9 8 3 ~ i l e d : JUN 3 0 1983 Clerk Mr. J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. T h i s appeal comes from t h e District Court of t h e Seventh J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , County of Dawson. W e a r e asked t o review an o r d e r denying p r o b a t e of c e r t a i n papers a l l e g e d t o c o n s t i t u t e a h o l o g r a p h i c w i l l . August Unruh d i e d i n February 1981. A f t e r h i s d e a t h , h i s deceased w i f e ' s b r o t h e r , Raymond Johnson, found an envelope among h i s p e r s o n a l belongings. The envelope was s e a l e d and contained f o u r p i e c e s of paper. On t h e o u t s i d e of t h e envelope, t h e s e words were w r i t t e n ; "names and a d d r e s s e s of those t o be named i n w i l l . " my - Under t h e s e words t h e s i g n a t u r e of August Unruh a p p e a r s . On each of t h e four p i e c e s of p a p e r , v a r i o u s names and a d d r e s s e s a r e l i s t e d . I t is a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e r e a r e two lists; one list c o n t a i n i n g names and a d d r e s s e s of Mr. Unruh's s i d e of t h e family, and t h e o t h e r c o n t a i n i n g names and a d d r e s s e s of h i s w i f e ' s s i d e of t h e family. On August 9 , 1982, Raymond Johnson f i l e d an amended applica- t i o n f o r formal p r o b a t e of w i l l and appointment of p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . I n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n , Mr. Johnson s t a t e d t h a t he had been unable t o l o c a t e a f o r m a l l y executed w i l l and t h e r e f o r e he requested t h e c o u r t t o e n t e r an o r d e r allowing p r o b a t e of t h e envelope and t h e accompanying four p i e c e s of paper. A hearing was held a f t e r which t h e c o u r t e n t e r e d its o r d e r denying t h e a p p l i c a t i o n . W e a f f i r m . A p p e l l a n t contends t h a t t h e w r i t i n g s met t h e s t a t u t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t s of a holographic w i l l , and any q u e s t i o n concerning Mr. Unruh's i n t e n t could be proved by o r a l evidence. A h o l o g r a p h i c w i l l is one t h a t f a i l s t o meet t h e formal r e q u i r e - ments of s e c t i o n 72-2-302, MCA. A w r i t i n g " i s v a l i d a s a h o l o g r a p h i c w i l l , whether o r not w i t n e s s e d , i f t h e s i g n a t u r e and t h e m a t e r i a l p r o v i s i o n s a r e i n t h e handwriting of t h e t e s t a t o r . " S e c t i o n 72-2-303, MCA. The District Court concluded t h a t t h e r e were simply no t e s t a m e n t a r y p r o v i s i o n s . W e agree. The papers a r e only lists of v a r i o u s i n d i v i d u a l s . A w i l l is an " i n s t r u m e n t by which a person makes a d i s p o s i t i o n of h i s p r o p e r t y , . . . a l e g a l d e c l a r a t i o n of a man's i n t e n t i o n , which he w i l l s t o be per- formed a f t e r h i s d e a t h . . ." B a l l e n t i n e s Law D i c t i o n a r y , 1371 ( 3 r d Ed. 1969). Here t h e r e is no d i s p o s i t i o n of p r o p e r t y . A p p e l l a n t a l s o a r g u e s t h a t testimony from people who knew Mr. Unruh should have been admitted t o show t h a t he intended a l l t h o s e persons l i s t e d t o s h a r e e q u a l l y . However, a v a l i d w i l l m u s t e x i s t b e f o r e it can be construed o r i n t e r p r e t e d . I n Re E s t a t e of Gudmunsen ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 169 Mont. 53, 545 P.2d 146. The envelope and t h e four papers do not c o n s t i t u t e a v a l i d w i l l . The judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t Court is a f f i r m e d . W e concur: Ph-4 4qpcAdlccQJJ Chief ~ u s t i c e "