He must have active memory enough to bring to his mind the nature and particulars of the business to be transacted, and mental power enough to appreciate them, and act with sense and judgment in regard to them. He must have sufficient capacity to comprehend the condition of his property, his relations to the persons who were or should have been the objects of his bounty, and the scope and bearing of the provisions of his will. He must have sufficient active memory to collect in his mind, without prompting, the particulars or elements of the business to be transacted, and to hold them in his mind a sufficient length of time to perceive at least their obvious relations to each other, and be able to form some rational judgment in relation to them. Reviewing the various formulations of the test for testamentary capacity, we find that the Probate Court sufficiently paraphrased the test and thus applied the proper standard for determining testamentary capacity. Garrett also challenges the court's finding that Siebert possessed testamentary capacity.
Testamentary capacity is an issue of fact.
In a direct appeal from the Probate Court to this Court, the Probate Court's findings of fact stand unless clearly erroneous. We will not assume fact-finding authority where there is a choice of two permissible views of the weight of evidence. Because Garrett as the contestant had the burden of proving lack of testamentary capacity, and the Probate Court found that Siebert possessed said capacity, the Probate Court's findings concerning testamentary capacity will not be disturbed unless the evidence compelled a different result than that reached. Contrary to Garrett's contention, there is competent evidence that the Probate Court was justified in concluding that Siebert possessed testamentary capacity. Dane also testified that, during those discussions, Siebert appeared to know the members of his family, and, although they did not go into great detail about his assets, because of Siebert's gruff businesslike manner, they did discuss what he owned in relation to the specific devises in the will.