Scramstad et al. v. Stannard, (1996) 188 A.R. 23 (QB)

JudgeBinder, J.
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
Case DateJuly 10, 1996
Citations(1996), 188 A.R. 23 (QB)

Scramstad v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Parnell T. Scramstad, Donna Swartz, Barbara Smith, Victoria Foster and Daniel Foster (plaintiffs) v. Eileen Stannard (defendant)

(Action No. 9203-22779)

Indexed As: Scramstad et al. v. Stannard

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Binder, J.

July 10, 1996.

Summary:

A testatrix amended her will. Certain beneficiaries of her prior will were not included in her new will. The beneficiaries challenged the will, alleging that the testatrix lacked testamentary capacity or that her niece unduly influenced her.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the new will was valid.

Wills - Topic 303

Testamentary capacity - General principles - Tests for determining capacity - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench discussed the test to determine testamentary capacity - The court stated that "the test is one that can be answered by a layman possessed of good common sense based on everyday experience and judged on a 'balance of probabilities' that is: is it more probable than not, having regard to all of the evi­dence that a person at the time such person made his or her Will possessed or did not possess a disposing mind and memory to 'clearly discern and discreetly judge, all those things, and all those circumstances, which enter into the nature of a rational, fair and just testament'" - See paragraphs 136 to 140.

Wills - Topic 531

Testamentary capacity - Evidence and proof - A testatrix's will provided that the residue of her estate go to her "children" - The testatrix only had step-children - A niece noticed the error and suggested that the will be corrected - The niece made an appointment with the lawyer who had prepared the will - The testatrix and the niece met with the lawyer and the testatrix made a new will which did not mention the step-children - The step-children claimed that the testatrix lacked the testa­mentary capacity to make the will - The step-children relied in part on an assess­ment done of the testatrix seven months after the will was executed which indicated that she had "significant global cognitive impairment" - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the evidence showed that the testatrix had the necessary testamentary capacity - See paragraphs 121 to 144.

Wills - Topic 541

Testamentary capacity - Evidence and proof - Doctrine of suspicious circum­stances - A testatrix's will provided that the residue of her estate go to her "children" - The testatrix only had step-children - A niece noticed the error and suggested that the will be corrected - The niece made an appointment with the law­yer who had prepared the will - The tes­tatrix and the niece met with the lawyer and the testatrix made a new will which did not mention the step-children - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the circumstances amounted to suspicious circumstances and the onus shifted to the niece (who was attempting to uphold the will) to prove that the testatrix was aware of the contents of the will, approved of the contents and had the necessary testamen­tary capacity - See paragraphs 118 to 120.

Wills - Topic 541

Testamentary capacity - Evidence and proof - Doctrine of suspicious circum­stances - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench stated that the burden of proof of due execution, knowledge, approval and testamentary capacity rests upon the propounder of the will - The burden of proof of undue influence rests on those attacking the will - Upon proof that the will was duly executed, it is generally presumed that the testator knew and approved of the contents and had the necessary testamentary capacity - How­ever where the presumption is rebutted by evidence of suspicious circumstances surrounding the making of the will the onus of proof shifts back to the propounder of the will - The burden of proof on a balance of probabilities increases in proportion to the seriousness of the suspicious circumstances - If the propounder answers the suspicious cir­cumstances and meets the onus the will is proven unless undue influence is proven on a balance of probabilities by those attack­ing the will - See paragraphs 118 to 119.

Wills - Topic 1704

Preparation and execution - Undue influ­ence - What constitutes - A testatrix's will provided that the residue of her estate go to her "children" - The testatrix only had step-children - A niece noticed the error and suggested that the will be corrected - The niece made an appointment with the lawyer who had prepared the will - The testatrix and the niece met with the lawyer and the testatrix made a new will which did not mention the step-children - The step-children claimed that the niece exerted undue influence on the testatrix - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the step-children failed to establish undue influence on the balance of prob­abilities - The court stated that the evi­dence showed that the testatrix was strong willed and could not easily be unduly influenced - See paragraphs 145 to 150.

Wills - Topic 1714

Preparation and execution - Undue influ­ence - Evidence - [See second Wills - Topic 541 ].

Cases Noticed:

Eady v. Waring (1974), 43 D.L.R.(3d) 667 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 65].

Public Trustee (Alta.) v. Dickson (1986), 72 A.R. 170; 46 Alta. L.R.(2d) 294 (Surr. Ct.), refd to. [para. 65].

Hay Estate, Re, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 876; 183 N.R. 1; 82 O.A.C. 161; 125 D.L.R.(4th) 431, refd to. [paras. 118, 146].

Vout v. Hay - see Hay Estate, Re.

Leger et al. v. Poirier, [1944] S.C.R. 152, refd to. [paras. 128, 140].

Marsh v. Tyrrell & Hardy (1828), 2 Hag. Ecc. 84, refd to. [para. 128].

Murphy v. Lamphier (1914), 31 O.L.R. 287 (H.C.), affd. (1914), 20 D.L.R. 906 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 129].

Russell v. Fraser (1980), 118 D.L.R.(3d) 733 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 129].

Wintle v. Nye, [1959] 1 All E.R. 552 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 129].

Riach et al. v. Ferris, [1934] S.C.R. 725; [1935] 1 D.L.R. 118, refd to. [para. 129].

Banks v. Goodfellow (1870), L.R. 5 Q.B. 549 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 129, 136].

Collicut Estate, Re (1994), 128 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 359 A.P.R. 81 (Prob. Ct.), affd. (1994), 134 N.S.R.(2d) 137; 383 A.P.R. 137 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 129].

Spence v. Price, [1946] O.W.N. 80 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 132].

Baker Estate v. Myhre (1995), 168 A.R. 248; 28 Alta. L.R.(3d) 428 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 132].

Koncz and Koncz v. Gyulay Estate et al. (1988), 86 A.R. 355; 58 Alta. L.R.(2d) 299 (Surr. Ct.), refd to. [para. 132].

O'Neil v. Royal Trust Co., [1946] S.C.R. 622, refd to. [para. 132].

Pomerleau v. Fraser et al. (1988), 86 A.R. 104 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 132].

Candido v. Ciardullo (1991), 45 E.T.R. 99 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 132].

Counsel:

James H. Odishaw, for the plaintiffs;

Frans Slatter, for the defendant.

This action was heard by Binder, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on July 10, 1996.

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • Kolacz v. Burdeinei et al., (1997) 194 A.R. 321 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 10 Enero 1997
    ...1]. Lynch Estate v. Lynch Estate (1993), 138 A.R. 41; 8 Alta. L.R.(3d) 291 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 1]. Scramstad et al. v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. Goodman Estate v. Geffen, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 353; 127 N.R. 241; 125 A.R. 81; 14 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 1]. Bank of......
  • Campbell v Ensminger,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 5 Mayo 2022
    ...into Alberta law by many cases and, specifically, by Justice Binder of this court in Scramstad v Stannard, 1996 CanLII 10408 (AB QB), [1996] 188 AR 23 at para 130, where he delineates the four-part (i)   the testator must understand the nature of the act and its effect; (ii) ......
  • Stiles Estate v. Stiles, 2003 ABQB 317
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 11 Febrero 2003
    ...Hay Estate, Re, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 876; 183 N.R. 1; 82 O.A.C. 161; 125 D.L.R.(4th) 431, consd. [para. 61]. Scramstad et al. v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23; 40 Alta. L.R.(3d) 324 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 66, 103]. Kolacz v. Burdeinei et al. (1997), 194 A.R. 321 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 68]. Martin, ......
  • Weidenberger Estate, Re, 2002 ABQB 861
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 26 Abril 2002
    ...(Q.B.), refd to. [para. 32]. Den v. Vancleve (1819), 2 Southard 589 (N.J. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 33]. Scramstad et al. v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23 (Q.B.), supplementary reasons (1996), 190 A.R. 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. Schwartz, Re, [1970] 2 O.R. 61 (C.A.), affd. [1972] S.C.R. 150,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • Kolacz v. Burdeinei et al., (1997) 194 A.R. 321 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 10 Enero 1997
    ...1]. Lynch Estate v. Lynch Estate (1993), 138 A.R. 41; 8 Alta. L.R.(3d) 291 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 1]. Scramstad et al. v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. Goodman Estate v. Geffen, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 353; 127 N.R. 241; 125 A.R. 81; 14 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 1]. Bank of......
  • Campbell v Ensminger,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 5 Mayo 2022
    ...into Alberta law by many cases and, specifically, by Justice Binder of this court in Scramstad v Stannard, 1996 CanLII 10408 (AB QB), [1996] 188 AR 23 at para 130, where he delineates the four-part (i)   the testator must understand the nature of the act and its effect; (ii) ......
  • Weidenberger Estate, Re, 2002 ABQB 861
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 26 Abril 2002
    ...(Q.B.), refd to. [para. 32]. Den v. Vancleve (1819), 2 Southard 589 (N.J. Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 33]. Scramstad et al. v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23 (Q.B.), supplementary reasons (1996), 190 A.R. 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. Schwartz, Re, [1970] 2 O.R. 61 (C.A.), affd. [1972] S.C.R. 150,......
  • Stiles Estate v. Stiles, 2003 ABQB 317
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 11 Febrero 2003
    ...Hay Estate, Re, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 876; 183 N.R. 1; 82 O.A.C. 161; 125 D.L.R.(4th) 431, consd. [para. 61]. Scramstad et al. v. Stannard (1996), 188 A.R. 23; 40 Alta. L.R.(3d) 324 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 66, 103]. Kolacz v. Burdeinei et al. (1997), 194 A.R. 321 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 68]. Martin, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT