Opinion ID: 2614994
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: a: mr. sargent's incompetency

Text: The trial court found that Mr. Sargent was unable to understand the nature and consequences of the August 1981 transaction. The Papperts contend that the trial court's finding of incompetency was clearly erroneous. [2] We disagree. Dr. Nemiroff testified that Mr. Sargent would have had difficulty making judgments about real estate transactions during the summer of 1981. [3] Testimony by Mr. Sargent's employees and his wife indicated that Mr. Sargent was often forgetful and confused during this time. Although the evidence of incompetency in August 1981 is not overwhelming, deference to the findings of the trial court is particularly appropriate when, as in this case, the bulk of the evidence at trial is oral testimony. Martens v. Metzgar, 591 P.2d 541, 544 (Alaska 1979).