In an effort to provide a better understanding for what testamentary capacity expert psychologists look for when forming opinions about whether the person had testamentary capacity in the execution of a will, trust, beneficiary designation, or other testamentary contractual document, I am highlighting the statutes, case law, and jury instructions specific to all 50 states. Each will be in its own blog post. Fifteenth up, Iowa.

In re: Estate of Cory, 169 N.W.2d 837 (Iowa 1969)

To have testamentary capacity, the testator must:

1.     Understand the nature of the instrument he is executing;

2.    Know and understand the nature and extent of his bounty;

3.    Remember the natural objects of his bounty; and

4.    Know the distribution of his property he desires to make.

In re: Bresler’s Estate, 188 Iowa 458, 176 N.W. 249 (1920); In re: Estate of Heller, 233 Iowa 1356, 11 N.W.2d 586 (1943)

A perfect mind is not needed for testamentary capacity.

In re Estate of Faris, 159 N.W.2d 417 (Iowa 1968); In re Winslow's Will, 146 Iowa 67, 124 N.W. 895 (1910); Waters v. Waters, 201 Iowa 586, 207 N.W. 598 (1926)

The degree of competence necessary for testamentary capacity is less than that which is required to carry on business affairs or to make contracts.

Mastain v. Butschy, 224 Iowa 68, 81, 276 N.W. 79, 86 (1937)

Monomania is a “derangement of the mind in regard to a single subject, an insanity upon a particular subject only.”

Firestine v. Athinson, 206 Iowa 151, 218 N.W. 293 (1928)

The basis for holding that a belief is an insane delusion is that is it harbored without any evidence to support it.

For a thought to be an insane delusion, it must be established as completely false.

Riley v. Casey, 185 Iowa 461, 170 N.W. 742 (1919)

Proof of a mere mistake is not, on its own, proof of an insane delusion.

In re: Estate of Henry, 167 Iowa 557, 149 N.W. 605 (1914)

An insane delusion cannot be established without knowing the grounds for the belief and whether those grounds might cause a reasonable person to believe the insane delusion.

Zinkula v. Zinkula, 171 Iowa 287, 154 N.W. 158 (1915)

Where it is shown that the delusion is unfounded, and without it, in all probability, a different course of conduct would have been pursued, or where it is shown that the act of the testator was influenced by the delusion, and that, without such influence operating on his mind, he would have done other than he did, then his act is said to be the result of the delusion and not a deliberate act of a mind possessing testamentary capacity.

Lockie v. Estate of Baker, 208 Iowa 1293, 227 N.W. 160 (1929)

In order to invalidate a will due to monomania or an insane delusion, it must be shown that:

1.     There is no evidence whatever upon which to base such a belief;

2.    The belief was false and adhered to after its falsity had been shown by reasonable evidence;

3.    The thing believed was such that no person of sound mind would believe it;

4.    The testator failed to give up the belief, in the face of such reasonable evidence as would convince an ordinary, sound, and healthy mind; and

5.    The existence of such delusion was present in the mind of the testator and exercised controlling influence at the time the will was executed.

In re: Guardianship of Property of Stark, 254 Iowa 598, 118 N.W.2d 537 (1962)

A voluntary guardianship does not raise the presumption of lack of testamentary capacity.

Cahill v. Cahill, 155 Iowa 340, 136 N.W. 214 (1912); In re: Will of Fenton, 97 Iowa 192, 66 N.W. 99 (1896)

A testator placed under guardianship involuntarily due to insanity is considered prima facie incapable of making a will. This shifts the burden to the proponent of the will to prove capacity.