Simpson v. Williamson

Clydia Williamson (defendant) filed a motion for summary judgment to validate Edwin Williamson’s will for submission to probate. Simpson (plaintiff) challenged, arguing Edwin’s will was improperly executed. The submitted will contained signatures from Edwin and both attesting witnesses, Niven and Bass. A self-proving affidavit was included as the last page of the will, signed by Edwin and both witnesses, and stated that Edwin signed the will in a rational state of mind and that Edwin, Niven, and Bass each signed in the presence of the others. Welden, Edwin’s attorney, notarized the will at the bottom of the self-proving affidavit. In support of Simpson’s challenge, Bass submitted an affidavit alleging that (1) he did not sign the will in front of both Edwin and Niven, as required; (2) Welden presented the will to him after Edwin and Niven had already signed it; and (3) the will was improperly notarized because Welden notarized it on the self-proving affidavit rather than on the will itself. As a counter, Clydia submitted an affidavit from Welden stating he was in the presence of Edwin, Niven, and Bass when all three signed the will, including the self-proving affidavit, which he then notarized in their presence. Clydia further argued that the will was valid even if Bass was disqualified as a witness because Welden could stand in as the second witness. The probate court granted Clydia’s motion for summary judgment, and Simpson appealed.