Court Opinion

ID: 9529387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:50:23.850028+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:45.894748
License: Public Domain

TRAYNOR, J.
I concur in the holding of the majority opinion that the evidence of an advantage gained by plaintiff’s testate is sufficient to give rise to the presumptions of undue influence and insufficient consideration mentioned in section 2235 of the Civil Code and that the evidence considered as a whole does not as a matter of law dispel the presumption of undue influence. I cannot agree, however, with the statement, and the implications flowing therefrom, that these presumptions are evidence. (See dissenting opinions in Speck v. Sarver, 20 Cal.2d 585, 590 [128 P.2d 16], and Scott v. Burke, 39 Cal.2d 388, 402 [247 P.2d 313].)
Edmonds, J., concurred.