The San Francisco call., 1896-10-23
Cannot Be on Both Sides of the
Case at One and the
Same Time.
DOUBLE DEALING CHARGED.
Notice of a Motion to Strike Out
Their Answer to the 0pposi.
tion Filed.

Notice was yesterday filed by Delmas q
ShorIridge, attorneys for Marc Leving-
ston, petitioner for the probate of the
pencil Will of James 6. Fair. that on Octo-
ber so they will ask the court to strike out
the answer filed by Virginia Fair and
Theresa A. OeIrichs to the grounds OF op-
position of the probate of that will, pre-
sented and filed by Charles L. Fair, Her.
man Oelrichs Jr. and others.
The motion will be made upon the
ground that the answer of the Fair sisters
was not filed in good faith.
In his affidavit in support of the motion
Marc Levingston says that on March Is,
1895, Miss Fair, Mrs. Oelrichs and Charles
L. Fair filed document purporting to be
the last will of tLeir father, and to have
been wholly written, dated and signed by
him, and prayed that it might be admitted
to probate, and thereafter repeatedly and
solemnly averred that the paper was
indeed the last will of James G. Fair.
1t is further alleged that the children
were most anxious to have the will adj
mitted to probate, but that since then,
for the purpose OF avoiding certain obli-
cations which would become incumbent
upon them on the probate of that will,
they have acted together for the purpose
of securing the probate OF prior will,
dated September 81, 1894, which docu-
ment they know not to be and have
averred not to be the last will of James G.
Fair.
To secure the end in view Charles l..
Fair is said to have withdrawn his petit
tion for the probate of the will OF Septem-
Der "a, and to have filed an opposition
thereto, to which opposition his sisters
appeared as defendants. Their defense,
hn,v has oh oil fnrYp
made with view to defeating the probate
of the document.
On August 5, 1896. the sisters filed their
answer to the opposition of Charles L.
Fair and to that of Van r. Paterson, in
which they aver that they have no in
formation or belief upon the subject OF
whether or not the will of September "a
was written or signed by their father, and
so deny that such is the fact.
This answer is declared by DR.. Leving-
ston to be in direct contradiction 10 the
petition they had previously filed, wherein
they positively declared the document to
have been wholly written, dated and
signed by James 6. Fair.
Within 4 month past the two ladies de-
clared, under oath. upon the taking of
their dispositions, that they believed the
will to be forgery, and Reuben II. Lloyd,
their attorney, has declared that they in
tend to contest it. Therefore, as such is
the intention of Miss Fair and Mrs.
Oelrichs, and as their only pleading in the
contest of Charles L. Fair is an answer in
which they deny that the will is not gen.
une, the motion will be made to strike
out that answer, it being claimed that
their attitude is calculated to defeat the
petition OF affisnt by making them osten-
sibly allies and enabling them in reality
to Illustrate all his attempts to secure the
probate of the will by giving them practi-
cal control of both sides of the ntest.
1t is further averred that since Virginia
Fair and Theresa A. Oelrichs no longer
desire the probate of the said will, justice
and good faith require that they take their
stand with it's contestants and cease to
appear as defendants and ostensible oppo-
nents of TIE contest.