## Facts

- In Bourges, France, a succession dispute arose after the death of Mrs. Redenbach.
- A purported holographic will (handwritten will) was attributed to Redenbach.
- The will disinherited Mrs. Kirsch, Redenbach’s sister.
- The will designated Davoust as the sole heir.
- Mr. and Mrs. Kirsch brought an action challenging the will and advanced factual assertions aimed at defeating Davoust’s claim to inherit.
- In the course of the challenge, the Kirsches asserted (among other contentions) that Redenbach had left no testamentary instrument and attributed sentiments and circumstances to Redenbach that were not shown by proof.
- At trial, the Kirsches failed to produce evidence supporting key allegations advanced to attack the will.
- The trial court rejected the challenge, ruled in favor of Davoust as sole heir under the holographic will, and assessed damages against the Kirsches based on the unfounded nature of their allegations and the manner in which they pursued the litigation.
- The Kirsches appealed to the French Court of Cassation, seeking to set aside the judgment that both upheld the will and imposed damages.

## Issues

1. Whether a party who contests a holographic will with factual allegations it cannot substantiate may be held civilly liable in damages to the opposing party for misuse of the right to bring suit.
2. Whether the trial court’s judgment upholding the holographic will and awarding damages against the challengers should be set aside on appeal to the Court of Cassation.

## Decision

- The Court of Cassation rejected the Kirsches’ appeal.
- The judgment in favor of Davoust, upholding the holographic will designating him as sole heir, was left in place.
- The damages assessed against the Kirsches were affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- A litigant who attacks a will must support its factual allegations with proof; a mere set of assertions about the decedent’s intentions or supposed absence of a testament is not enough.
- The right to bring a civil action is not unlimited; when exercised without a serious factual basis and in a manner found wrongful toward the opposing party, it may give rise to civil liability.
- In a will contest, damages may be awarded against challengers when the action is found to have been brought or pursued on allegations that the challengers could not support, causing harm to the designated heir beyond ordinary litigation costs.

## Conclusion

Kirsch v. Davoust concerns a failed attempt by Mr. and Mrs. Kirsch to defeat a holographic will attributed to Mrs. Redenbach that disinherited Mrs. Kirsch and named Davoust as sole heir. Because the challengers advanced claims about Redenbach and the supposed lack of a testamentary instrument that they did not substantiate at trial, the courts not only enforced the will in Davoust’s favor but also imposed damages on the Kirsches; the Court of Cassation affirmed that result, recognizing that a baseless will contest can expose the challengers to civil damages for wrongful use of litigation.


Kirsch v. Davoust, 1926 Sirey 1.294 (1926)