limited testimony of the psychiatrists did demonstrate the weakened or
impaired condition of the patient.

CASE 2.  A 71-year-old widower made a will at age 59 leaving his estate to
his wife and adopted daughter.  Three years later, his wife died.  He later
became involved with another elderly woman with whom he closely as-
sociated and with whom he often travelled, although they did not live to-
gether.  When he was 70, he had a cerebral vascular accident while visiting
his girlfriend in the hospital where she was a patient.  After several weeks in
one hospital, he was transferred for a few months to a second hospital.  As a
result of the stroke, he became aphasic.  Six months later, he had one leg
amputated because of diabetic gangrene.  Three months following this, he
made a will, leaving his estate of roughly $200,000 in one-half to his adopted
daughter and one-half to his girlfriend.  The will was made after he sup-
posedly indicated by motions and occasional words his desire to make a
will.  His girlfriend called a woman friend whose son was an attorney.  He
prepared the will, which was signed appropriately by the testator after the
will was read to him, and to which he responded by nodding and other
motions.  The lawyer's mother, a witness, was named as executor.

    Two days after the making of the will, he had a second stroke.  Three
weeks later, he was seen by a psychiatrist who described him as labile,
crying, somewhat confused, but not psychotic.  Six months later, another
psychiatrist examined him after the adopted daughter sought to have him
declared incompetent.  This psychiatrist described him as able to com-
municate with sign language, limited writing and some words.  He was oriented
and had intact memory.  He died before any court hearing on this issue.  At
the nursing home, he could communicate bodily needs.  His internist felt that
he was not competent to handle his affairs.  Seven months after the second
stroke and the making of the will, he died.

    The daughter sought to have the will set aside on the basis of testamen-
tary incapacity.  The court ruled that, despite the aphasia, neurologic deficit
and cerebral vascular accident, he was competent to make a will;  however,
in weighing the total circumstances, which included the impaired overall
condition of the patient, multifold deficits and state of marked dependency
and the facts that the attorney who had prepared the will had had his mother
named as executor, the court ruled there was undue influence.  This
decision reflects the close scrutiny that will be directed at attorneys who
prepared wills in which they or associates have a financial interest.

CASE 3.  A 69-year-old widow was hospitalized after a cerebral vascular
accident with a left hemiparesis.  Six weeks earlier, she had had a similar
episode with a right-sided hemiparesis which cleared rapidly.  A psychiatric
consultation described described her as confused to some extent for a year,
incontinent for a year, with poor recent and remote memory.  She was depressed
and partially disoriented as to time.  She was felt to be incompetent due to an
organic brain syndrome that was severe and chronic.  A few weeks later, she
was transferred to a hospital in another state close to her daughter.