No. 13089
I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O MONTANA
F F
1976
I N THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF
ETHA W N T DONOVAN, a l s o known a s
A EA
Waneta Donovan, E. W. Donovan, and
Mrs. Waneta Donovan,
Deceased.
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e Ninth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
Honorable R. D. M c P h i l l i p s , Judge p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record :
For Appellant :
Robert Hurly a r g u e d , Glasgow, Montana
F o r Respondent:
Sherman and Anderson, Conrad, Montana
Douglas Anderson a r g u e d , Conrad, Montana
Submitted: February 4, 1976
Decided : FEB 2 4 1976
r . Suscicc Frank L. '-laswell d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t .
T h i s i s a n a p p e a l from an o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ,
Toole Zounty, t h e Hon. R. D. ? l c P h i l l i p s , d i s t r i c t j u d g e , d e n y i n g
a c l a i m t o j e w e l r y a l l e g e d l y p a s s i n g under a w i l l .
A p p e l l a n t i s V i o l a R i o r d a n , a l e g a t e e under t h e w i l l
oi .h"lrs. Etha Waneta Donovan, d e c e a s e d . Respondent i s B e r n i c e
~ a h Lutz, e x e c u t r i x of t h e e s t a t e .
l
Mrs. Donovan, a r e s i d e n t o f T o o l e County, d i e d on J u n e
1-2, I 9 7 3 l e a v i n g a w i l l t h a t s h e p e r s o n a l l y d r a f t e d d a t e d May 2 9 ,
1973. Her e s t a t e i s a p p r a i s e d i n e x c e s s of $340,000 and p a s s e s
co numerous f r i e n d s and r e l a t i v e s under t h e terms o f h e r w i l l .
The d i s p u t e i n t h i s c a s e r e v o l v e s around t h e d i s p o s i t i o n
or Y r s . 9onovan1s diamond engagement and wedding r i n g s e t , two
diamond d i n n e r r i n g s , a m u l t i s t o n e r i n g , a diamond b r o o c h , a
s i n g l e diamond e a r r i n g and a g e n t l e m a n ' s diamond r i n g . This
jewelry i s valued a t approximately $8,700. M r s . Donovan a l s o
p o s s e s s e d costume j e w e l r y a p p r a i s e d a t $100 t h a t p a s s e d under h e r
will.
P a r a g r a p h e i g h t of h e r w i l l p r o v i d e d :
"EIGHTH: I h e r e b y g i v e , d e v i s e and b e q u e a t h t o
V i o l a Riordan f i v e thousand d o l l a r s ( $ 5 , 0 0 0 ) , m y
sewing t a b l e . Z e n i t h Color T e l e v i s i o n s e t . t h r e e
p i e c e s of w h i t e Samsonite l u g g a g e , costum;! j e w e l r y , c u t
g l a s s v a s e and p i t c h e r , a l l m p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s and
y
c l o t h e s . I n t h e s a f e t y d e p o s i t box m s i l v e r d o l l a r s .
y
Also t o s a i d V i o l a R i o r d a n , I g i v e , d e v i s e and b e q u e a t h
a l l m r i g h t , t i t l e and i n t e r e s t i n t h e o i l and g a s
y
r o y a l t i e s and m i n e r a l i n t e r e s t s which I own on c e r t a i n
l a n d s i n Toole and G l a c i e r C o u n t i e s , Montana. I I
(Emphasis added) .
Paragraph t w e l v e o f t h e w i l l a u t h o r i z e s t h e e x e c u t r i x
t o s e l l a l l of t h e p r o p e r t y t h a t was n o t bequeathed o r d e v i s e d
elsewhere i n t h e w i l l .
O November 1 6 , 1973, t h e e x e c u t r i x p e t i t i o n e d t h e
n
d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h e j e w e l r y was n o t p a r t o f t h e
" p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s 1 ' d e s c r i b e d i n p a r a g r a p h e i g h t and t h a t i t s h o u l d
be s o l d pursuant t o paragraph twelve of t h e w i l l . Implicit i n
t h i s p e t i t i o n i s t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e jewelry was n o t bequeathed
under t h e words "costume jewelry". A o r d e r t o show c a u s e why t h e
n
jewelry should n o t be s o l d was i s s u e d on November 17, 1973. On
December 4 , 1973, a p p e l l a n t o b j e c t e d t o t h e proposed s a l e contending
t h e jewelry was given t o h e r by paragraph e i g h t of t h e w i l l .
Then, on December 6 , 1973, t h e e x e c u t r i x f i l e d a s an
e x h i b i t an envelope found i n Mrs. ~ o n o v a n ' s s a f e t y d e p o s i t box
c o n t a i n i n g t h e diamond gentleman's r i n g , t h a t a p p e l l a n t contends
i s one of t h e p i e c e s of jewelry l e f t t o h e r . Mrs. Donovan had
w r i t t e n a n o t e on t h e envelope s t a t i n g t h a t t h e r i n g was t o be
given t o Brian Lenz, when he reached 21 y e a r s of age. The
e x e c u t r i x p e t i t i o n e d t h e c o u r t t o determine whether t h i s r i n g
should be d i s t r i b u t e d t o Brian Lenz a s a p r e c a t o r y g i f t . Appellant
o b j e c t e d and prayed t h a t t h e g i f t be found void.
O May 1 3 , 1975, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e g i f t
n
t o Brian Lenz f a i l e d f o r l a c k of a d e l i v e r y which would complete
the g i f t . The c o u r t a l s o found M r s . Donovan d i d n o t i n t e n d t o
g r a n t a p p e l l a n t t h e jewelry b u t i n s t e a d intended t o d i s p o s e of
i t by s a l e under paragraph twelve of h e r w i l l . The c o u r t i s s u e d
an o r d e r f o r t h e s a l e of t h e jewelry from which t h i s a p p e a l i s
taken.
The i s s u e f o r review i s whether t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t was
c o r r e c t i n determining t h a t t h e 7testa.trix- d i d n o t i n t e n d t o
bequeath h e r jewelry t o a p p e l l a n t .
The c r u x of t h i s c a s e i s t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n determining
what t h e t e s t a t r i x meant by t h e words "costume jewelry" and " a l l
m personal effects".
y Since t h e w i l l took e f f e c t p r i o r t o t h e
adoption of t h e Montana Uniform Probate Code, t h e s t a t u t e s i n
e f f e c t a t t h a t time govern t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h i s w i l l . In the
Matter o f t h e E s t a t e of Gudmunsen, Mont ,-3 - 2d
P. ->
33 %.Rep. 57.
S e c t i o n 91-201, R.C.M. 1947, provided:
"A w i l l i s t o be construed according t o t h e
intention of the testator.9~ * *"
Section 91-202, R.C.M. 1947, provided:
II
I n t e n t i o n t o b e a s c e r t a i n e d from w i l l . I n
c a s e s of u n c e r t a i n t y a r i s i n g upon t h e f a c e of a
w i l l , a s t o t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of any of i t s p r o v i s i o n s .
t h e t e s t a t o r f s i n t e n t i o n i s t o b e - a s c e r t a i n e d from *
t h e words of t h e w i l 1 , t a k i n g i n t o view t h e circum-
s t a n c e s under which i t was made. e x c l u s i v e of h i s
o r a l declarations . (Emphasis added. )
Words used i n a . w i l - 1 a r e t o be taken i n t h e i r o r d i n a r y
and grammatical s e n s e , u n l e s s t h e r e i s a c l e a r i n t e n t i o n t o g i v e
them a n o t h e r meaning. S e c t i o n 91-208, R.C.M. 1947. The d e f i n i t i o n
of costume jewelry, given i n W e b s t e r l s Third New I n t e r n a t i o n a l
D i c t i o n a r y , 1971, p. 515, i s :
1I
Jewelry f o r wear w i t h c u r r e n t f a s h i o n s usu. made
o f inexpensive m a t e r i a l s ( a s metal, s h e l l s , p l a s t i c s ,
wood) o f t e n s e t w i t h i m i t a t i o n o r semiprecious
s t o n e s . 11
W hold t h e jewelry i n q u e s t i o n i s n o t costume jewelry.
e
I t i s valued a t approximately $8,700 and fashioned of expensive
and p r e c i o u s m a t e r i a l s . W f u r t h e r hold t h e words "costume
e
jewelry1' were intended t o pass only t h e $100 worth o f costume
jewelry t o a p p e l l a n t i n accordance w i t h t h e d e f i n i t i o n quoted
above, and n o t t h e more v a l u a b l e p i e c e s .
The maxim "expressio unius e s t e x c l u s i o a l t e r i u s "
( t h e e x p r e s s i o n of one t h i n g i m p l i e s t h e e x c l u s i o n of a n o t h e r )
f u r t h e r supports t h i s construction. This r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n
has been expressed i n t h i s language i n lack's Law D i c t i o n a r y ,
Revised Fourth E d i t i o n , 1968, p. 692:
I IWhen c e r t a i n persons o r t h i n g s a r e s p e c i f i e d
i n a law. c o n t r a c t . o r w i l l . an i n t e n t i o n t o
exclude a l l o t h e r s 'from i t s ' o p e r a t i o n may be
inferred. II
The express mention of "costume jewelry1' i n d i c a t e s t h a t
Mrs. Donovan d i d n o t i n t e n d t o i n c l u d e h e r expensive j e w e l r y i n
h e r bequest t o a p p e l l a n t . The attempted g i f t o f t h e gentleman's
r i n g t o Brian Lenz i s a f u r t h e r circumstance supporting t h i s con-
struction. Even chough t h e attempted g i f t d c c u r r e d p r i o r ro r h e
d r a f t i n g o f t h e w i l l , i t n o n e t h e l e s s d e m o n s t r a t e s Mrs. Donovan's
usage o f t h e terms i n v o l v e d .
Next w e d e t e r m i n e whether t h e j e w e l r y was bequeathed i n t h e
phrase " a l l m p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s " .
y Appellant contends t h a t t h e
p h r a s e i s g e n e r a l i n scope and encompasses t h e j e w e l r y . W find,
e
however, u n d e r t h e d o c t r i n e o f ejusdem g e n e r i s , t h a t t h e g e n e r a l i t y
of t h e p h r a s e i n and of i t s e l f d e f e a t s t h i s argument. Ejusdem
Generis i s a r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n . I n A l e k s i c h v. I n d u s t r i a l Acc.
Fund, 116 Mont. 1 2 7 , 1 3 9 , 1 5 1 ~ 4 0 1 6 , h i s Court s t a t e d :
t
"The d o c t r i n e o f ejusdem g e n e r i s i s a w e l l known r u l e
of c o n s t r u c t i o n t o a i d i n a s c e r t a i n i n g t h e meaning
o f s t a t u t e s and o t h e r w r i t t e n i n s t r u m e n t s , t h e d o c t r i n e
b e i n g t h a t where a n enumeration o f s p e c i f i c t h i n g s
i s f o l l o w e d by some more g e n e r a l word o r p h r a s e , s u c h
general phrase i s t o be held t o r e f e r t o t h i n g s of
t h e same k i n d a s t h o s e enumerated. I I
Under t h i s r u l e o f c o n s t r u c t i o n t h e meaning o f " a l l m p e r s o n a l
y
e f f e c t s " must be r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e same c l a s s o f goods s p e c i f i c a l l y
enumerated i n p a r a g r a p h e i g h t of t h e w i l l , Anno. 30 ALR3d 797,
841; 80 Am J u r 2d, W i l l s , §§ 1136,1255. The p h r a s e r e f e r s o n l y
t o i t e m s o f costume j e w e l r y and c a n n o t b e expanded t o i n c l u d e
the t e s t a t r i x ' s more e x p e n s i v e j e w e l r y which i s o f a d i f f e r e n t
type o r c l a s s .
A p p e l l a n t a s s e r t s t h e b e q u e s t of p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s means
nothing i f i t does n o t include t h i s jewelry. This contention i s
without merit a s t h e typesof personal e f f e c t s r e f e r r e d t o a r e
t h o s e s p e c i f i c a l l y enumerated i n p a r a g r a p h e i g h t o f t h e w i l l .
I n I n r e s i l v e r ' s E s t a t e , 98 Mont. 1 4 1 , 150, 38 P.2d 277,
t h i s Court s t a t e d :
"When a w i l l c o n t e s t i s i n s t i t u t e d , t h e c o n t e s t a n t
assumes t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e p l a i n t i f f i n a c i v i l
a c t i o n , and t h e burden r e s t s upon him t o e s t a b l i s h
t h e f a c t s which h e a l l e g e s w i l l w a r r a n t t h e s e t t i n g
a s i d e of t h e i n t e n t i o n of t h e t e s t a t o r , o r t h e
d e c l a r a t i o n t h a t t h e i n s t r u m e n t c h a l l e n g e d does n o t
e x p r e s s t h a t i n t e n t i o n , by a preponderance o f t h e
e v i d e n c e . 11
I f t h e c o n t e s t a n t f a i l s t o meet t h i s burden by producing
evidence t o support h i s a l l e g a t i o n s , t h e c o u r t must r u l e a g a i n s t
him even i f h i s opponent has produced no evidence whatsoever.
The s o l e concern of t h e t r i a l judge a t t h i s p o i n t i s t h e s t r e n g t h
o r weakness of t h e c o n t e s t a n t ' s c a s e . 1 anc croft's Probate
P r a c t i c e , 2d ed. $205, pp. 494,495.
Although t h e i n s t a n t c a s e i s n o t a w i l l c o n t e s t i n t h e
s t r i c t s e n s e of t h e term, i t i s a c o n f l i c t between t h e e x e c u t r i x
of t h e w i l l a t t e m p t i n g t o c a r r y o u t i t s p r o v i s i o n s and a n o t h e r .
A s such t h e same r u l e a p p l i e s and t h e burden of proof i s on
appellant. A t the d i s t r i c t court level appellant f a i l e d t o
p r e s e n t any e x p e r t testimony o r evidence t h a t would support h e r
c o n t e n t i o n t h a t "costume j ewelryl' i n c l u d e s expensive jewelry w i t h
precious stones. N d i r e c t evidence was o f f e r e d t o show t h a t Mrs.
o
Donovan intended t o bequeath h e r jewelry t o a p p e l l a n t . Appellant
d i d n o t meet h e r burden of proof and t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t had no
a l t e r n a t i v e but t o r u l e against her.
The o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s affirmed.
Justice
f g/
e'
W Concur:
e
m Justices.