## Facts

- Carl Edward “Tag” Raney executed a will on October 27, 1987, and died on January 17, 1989.
- The will left $25 to each of Raney’s children and devised the residue of the estate to Raney’s sisters.
- Raney had a history of alcoholism, anger, and severe family conflict, including earlier litigation with his mother and sisters over his father’s estate.
- In 1985, Raney’s children obtained a conservatorship over him after his condition impaired his ability to manage finances.
- Raney believed the conservatorship was sought to preserve his assets for the children’s eventual inheritance, and he resented them for it.
- While incarcerated in 1987, Raney consulted an attorney, discussed his property and family, and executed the will in the presence of multiple witnesses.
- The drafting attorney and other execution witnesses later testified Raney was of sound mind and competent at the time of execution.
- Raney’s children contested the will, asserting he lacked testamentary capacity because his belief about their motives constituted an insane delusion.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence supported a finding that Raney lacked testamentary capacity at the time he executed the 1987 will.
2. Whether Raney’s belief that his children sought the conservatorship to protect their anticipated inheritance was an insane delusion that negated testamentary capacity.

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s ruling invalidating the will.
- The court held the contestants did not prove lack of testamentary capacity at the time of execution.
- The court held Raney’s belief about his children’s motives was not an insane delusion because it had some factual basis.
- The court upheld the 1987 will as valid.

## Legal Principles

- Testamentary capacity exists if, at execution, the testator understands the nature and extent of property, the disposition intended, the natural objects of bounty, and the claims of those included or excluded.
- The relevant time for assessing capacity is the moment the will is executed; other evidence is considered only to assist that determination.
- A belief is not an insane delusion if there are facts upon which the testator could base the belief, even if the belief is harsh, mistaken, or exaggerated.
- The will contestant bears the burden to prove incapacity, including incapacity allegedly caused by insane delusion.
- If capacity is present, a testator may dispose of property as desired, including disinheriting close relatives, and courts will not invalidate the will merely because the reasons appear unfair.

## Conclusion

The Kansas Supreme Court validated Raney’s will, concluding that the contestants failed to prove he lacked testamentary capacity at execution and that his negative belief about his children’s conservatorship motives, though possibly erroneous, was not an insane delusion under Kansas law.


In re Estate of Raney, 799 P.2d 986 (Kan. 1990)