Case Name: In re Goking's Will
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1899-09-26
Citations: 104 Wis. 28
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re Goking’s Will.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 104
Pages: 28–29

Head Matter:
In re Goking’s Will.
September 5
September 26, 1899.
Wills: Undue influence.
A finding of the trial oourt that an alleged will was not procured by undue influence on the part of the testator’s widow is held to he sustained by the evidence.
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Sheboy-gan county: N. S. Gilsom, Circuit Judge.
Affirmed.
This is a will contest. William Goking, the testator, was born in Germany in 1822, and was married to Louisa Golc-vug, his widow and the proponent of the will, in 1851. He came to this country in 1852, and lived until his death, March 12, 1897, most of the time in Sheboygan county, in this state. He had accumulated about $30,000 worth of prop erty, and left surviving hnn his widow, the proponent, and five adult children. He executed the will in question July 17, 1878, leaving everything to his widow. The will was differed for probate, and due execution thereof was proven; but four of the children contested the will on the ground of undue influence on the part of the widow. The will was admitted to probate in the county court of Sheboygan county, and upon appeal to the circuit court the same judgment was rendered, and from that judgment the contestants prosecute this appeal.
The cause was submitted for the appellants on the brief of Martin Hughes and A. C. Prescott, and for the respondent on that of Francis Williams.

Opinion:
Winslow, J.
The sole question in this case was one of fact, namely, as to whether the alleged will was procured by undue influence on the part of the testator's widow. Upon this question there was testimony upon both sides. The circuit court found the issue in favor of the proponent of the will, and wTe cannot say that such finding is not justified by the evidence. A review of the evidence would be profitless.
By the Court.— Judgment affirmed.