Supreme Court

                                            SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

                                     Citation: Isenor (Estate) v. Cheaters, 2004 NSSC 76

                                                                                                                                 Date:  20040413

                                                                                                                  Docket: (Prob. Ct.) 52829

                                                                                                                                Registry:  Halifax

                                            In the Estate of Dora Sylvia Isenor, deceased

Between:

                                                                 Patrick O’Malley

                                                                                                                                              Applicant

                                                                             v.

Ronald Charles Cheaters, Judith Adelaide Barron, Sylvia Eileen Ingraham, Sarah Barron, Courtney Ingraham, Kayla Ingraham, Joseph Richard Barron, Wanda Hubley and Debbie O’Malley (nee Ingraham)

                                                                                                                                         Respondents

                                                         LIBRARY HEADING

Judge:             The Honourable Justice Walter R. E. Goodfellow

Heard:                        April 1^st and 2^nd, 2004 in Halifax                                                          

Subject:                       WILLS - FORGERY  

Summary:                   Dora Isenor gave instructions to a lawyer for a will March 22^nd, 1986 leaving everything to her then husband and if he predeceased her, to her two daughters with specific requests to grandchildren.  Dora’s husband died March 22^nd, 1993.  In March 1998 she met Mr. Cheaters and began a common-law relationship with him in October 2001.  She had a major upset with one daughter in March of 1998.  Dora gave instruction to lawyer for a new will appointing family accountant executor and family friend alternate executor.  This will executed September 11^th, 1998 left everything to her two daughters and specific requests to grandchildren.  Dora died in hospital January 21^st, 2003.  She had given September 11^th, 1998 will to accountant  and while in the hospital, advised her daughter that there was a copy of her will in her bible along with a letter to the other daughter.  On attending Mr. Cheaters home, she could not locate the bible.  Mr. Cheaters gave evidence that as far as he knew, the bible was still there but said he never checked to see whether or not there was a copy of another will or a letter in the bible.  On January 23^rd, 2003 a further “will” surfaced leaving everything to common-law husband.  Origin of this July 21^st, 2002 will “unknown”.  Not likely prepared by a lawyer.  Alleged that it was executed by Dora at the home of a paralegal friend of the common-law husband.  Daughter, accountant, and alternate executor all gave evidence Dora would not disinherit her children or grandchildren.  Signature on “will” July 22^nd, 2002 said by accountant not to be Dora’s signature.  Dora, while in hospital, had given instructions to her daughter for her cat, BABE, to be put to sleep.  The “will” July 22^nd, 2002 gave the cat, BABES, to the common-law husband.  Issues of credibility determined against common-law husband and his witnesses.  Forensic document examiner, with a number of documents previously signed over a time span by Dora, gave expert opinion that the signature “Dora Sylvia Isenor” on the July 22^nd, 2002 “will” was a forgery.   

Issue:                          Validity of will.

Result:                        Court concluded the signature “Dora Sylvia Isenor” on July 22^nd, 2002 “will” was a forgery, that it was not the signature of Dora Isenor, and applicant entitled to a declaration such was a forgery with directions that the will of September 11^th, 1998 can be admitted to probate.

            THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.                QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.