HUNTINGTON — The daughter of a deceased man is suing the executrix of the man's estate, citing alleged forgery and probate fraud.
Cassandra Price filed a complaint on May 2 in Cabell Circuit Court against Janie Price individually, Price as executrix of the estate of James David Price, and the estate itself, alleging that the executrix forged the signatures of the witnesses in order to receive the majority of the deceased man's assets.
According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that she was informed that the will of her father, James David Price, dated December 4, 2014, states that the majority of the deceased's assets will be given to the surviving wife, Janie Price. However, the plaintiff noticed that only the deceased's signature was notarized by Nondus L. Tassen; the witnesses', Leroy Holland and Beverly Wagers, were not, which makes the will not self-proving, according to the suit. As required of witnesses to a will, the witnesses were not able to verify that James Price was of 18 years of age, that he signed and acknowledged the will, and that they all signed with everyone present, the suit says. It also claims that one of the witnesses, Leroy Holland, a family friend, died Feb. 4, 2014, 10 months before the execution of the will, which allegedly means it was impossible for him to have witnessed the execution. The plaintiff holds Janie Price responsible because the defendant allegedly forged the signature of Leroy Holland to profit under the will, since if a person dies intestate, the assets will be equally distributed between the wife and the child, according to the suit.
The plaintiff seeks that the will of James David Price be held to be void and of no effect; that James David Price be deemed to have passed intestate; that the plaintiff be appointed administrator of the estate of James David Price; and such other, further and general relief as to equity that the nature of its case may require. She is represented by Paul Prunty and W. Merton Prunty of Prunty Law Offices in Huntington.
Cabell County Circuit Court Case number 16-c-305
