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.