Dougherty v. Rubenstein
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
172 Md. App. 269, 914 A.2d 184 (2007)
While in the hospital following a stroke, James Dougherty was disoriented, paranoid, and had extreme difficulty communicating. Two doctors examined James and certified that he suffered from dementia, that the dementia was permanent, and that as a result of his dementia James did not have the capacity to consent to the appointment of a guardian. James’ doctor recommended that he be placed in a nursing home. James’ only child, Jay Dougherty, placed James in a care home. James was angry with Jay for placing him in the care home, and refused to speak with Jay. James’ sister, Janet Rubenstein, removed James from the care home and returned James to his own home, where he improved and was able to live alone for several years. Jay had been handling James’ finances since James’ hospitalization. After James returned home, he accused Jay of stealing from him, and refused to consider any records that would have shown that Jay had not stolen from him. James executed a will that disinherited Jay, leaving his estate to his own sisters, including Janet. Jay (plaintiff) petitioned the circuit court to set aside James’ will, and Janet (defendant) sought probate of James’ will. The trial court disagreed with the hospital doctors’ opinion that James suffered from permanent dementia, because James was able to live and care for himself alone for several years. The trial court held that James’ belief that Jay had stolen from him was a delusion, but not an insane delusion, because James was not suffering from a mental disease when he executed his will. The court refused to set aside James’ will. Jay appealed, arguing that James’ will must be set aside because it was based on an insane delusion.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Eyler, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 687,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 687,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 43,000 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.