Schwartz v. Schwartz

Schwartz v. Schwartz

Where direct evidence from the testator, his solicitor and his treating physician shows the testator understood the facts and expressed a deliberate intention to alter his will, and there is no evidence of coercion, the will is valid despite family quarrel, a change of solicitor and substantial departure from prior wills; such circumstances do not justify inferring lack of testamentary capacity or undue influence.

Citation
[1972] SCR 150
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Jack Schwartz; Respondent / Executor: Morris Schwartz; Respondent / Executor: Abraham Schwartz
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 June 1971
Procedural Posture
Will Validity / Estate Dispute / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Capacity, Undue Influence, Knowledge and Approval of Will, Will Execution, Change of Solicitor, Beneficiary Exclusion
Source Language
English
Estates Wills Succession Civil Procedure Testamentary Capacity Undue Influence Knowledge and Approval of Will Will Execution +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jack Schwartz

Appellant / Plaintiff

Morris Schwartz

Respondent / Executor

Abraham Schwartz

Respondent / Executor

Procedural Posture

Will Validity / Estate Dispute / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1964 will was valid
  2. 2 Whether the testator had testamentary capacity
  3. 3 Whether the will was procured by undue influence

Ratio Decidendi

Where direct evidence from the testator, his solicitor and his treating physician shows the testator understood the facts and expressed a deliberate intention to alter his will, and there is no evidence of coercion, the will is valid despite family quarrel, a change of solicitor and substantial departure from prior wills; such circumstances do not justify inferring lack of testamentary capacity or undue influence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondents.
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.