## Facts

- James J. Dougherty III suffered a stroke, was hospitalized, and exhibited disorientation and difficulty communicating.
- Two physicians certified he had dementia, described as permanent, and lacked capacity to consent to a guardianship appointment; nursing-home placement was recommended.
- His son, James J. Dougherty IV, arranged placement in a care facility, after which James became angry with him and refused contact.
- James’s sister, Janet C. Rubenstein, removed him from the care facility and returned him to his home.
- After returning home, James improved and lived alone for several years.
- James accused his son of stealing from him and refused to consider records offered to rebut the accusation.
- James executed a will disinheriting his son and leaving his estate to his sisters, including Janet.

## Issues

1. Whether the testator’s belief that his son stole from him, lacking a reasonable factual basis, constituted an insane delusion invalidating the will.
2. Whether an insane delusion requires proof that the fixed false belief was the product of mental disease at the time of will execution.
3. Whether the trial court applied the correct standard and made factual findings supported by the record regarding the testator’s mental condition at execution.

## Decision

- The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland affirmed the judgment admitting the will to probate.
- The court held that the testator’s theft belief, though found to be a delusion, was not shown to be an insane delusion because the challenger did not prove it was caused by mental disease at the time of execution.
- The court deferred to the trial court’s factual determination that later functioning undermined the hospital-era conclusion of permanent dementia as of the execution date.
- Because the insane-delusion theory failed, the caveat was denied and the will remained valid.

## Legal Principles

- Testamentary capacity generally requires that the testator understand the nature and extent of property, recognize the natural objects of bounty, and form a rational plan of disposition.
- An insane delusion is a fixed false belief without reasonable factual basis, not correctable by reason or evidence, that is attributable to mental disease rather than mistake, resentment, prejudice, or ill will.
- Proof that a belief is unreasonable, unfair, or stubbornly maintained is insufficient; the dispositive requirement is a causal link to mental disease at the time the will was executed.
- Prior medical diagnoses may be weighed against evidence of later functioning; the relevant inquiry is the testator’s condition at execution.
- Appellate review respects the trial court’s fact-finding unless clearly erroneous, including determinations about mental condition and causation.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a will disinheriting the testator’s son, ruling that a baseless accusation of theft did not invalidate the will absent persuasive proof that the belief resulted from mental disease when the will was executed.


Dougherty v. Rubenstein, 172 Md. App. 269, 914 A.2d 184 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2007)