Summary
The plaintiff appealed interlocutory and final decrees dismissing her equity bill alleging that defendants fraudulently interfered with her father's attempt to revoke his existing will and execute a new one leaving equal shares to both daughters. The court examined whether the bill sufficiently pleaded facts to support a cause of action for wrongful interference and constructive trust, concluding that equitable relief was appropriate despite the existence of a prior probated will. The appellate court reversed the lower court's dismissal, holding that the allegations adequately stated a claim for which equity could impose a constructive trust.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiff may maintain an action for a constructive trust based on wrongful interference with the testator's intent to execute a new will.
Holdings
- The court held that the plaintiff may maintain an action for a constructive trust and reversed the interlocutory and final decrees dismissing the bill.
Key quotations
“The interlocutory decrees sustaining the demurrers and the final decree dismissing the bill are reversed. So ordered.” (at end)
“The bill sufficiently alleges that, but for the wrongful interference by the defendants with the attempt of the decedent to make a new will giving the plaintiff one half of his property, the plaintiff would have received this share of the property, and presents a case where a court of equity will impose a constructive trust for the benefit of the plaintiff to the extent of this share of the property which the defendants have wrongfully acquired.” (at end)
Factual background
Walter Micanowich executed a will on July 28, 1944, leaving all his property to the female defendant. The plaintiff, his daughter, alleged that the defendants conspired to prevent the testator from making a new will that would have given the plaintiff one half of the estate by falsely informing the testator's attorney. The plaintiff claimed she would have received half the property but for the defendants' interference.
Procedural history
The case was appealed from the trial court's interlocutory decree sustaining the defendants' demurrers and a final decree dismissing the plaintiff's bill of complaint.