
    Will of Puls: Rahte and another, Appellants, vs. Cook, Executor, Respondent.
    
      March 14
    
    May 1, 1945.
    
    
      
      Charles H. Gorman and Emmet Horan, both of Milwaukee, for the appellants.
    For the respondent there was a brief by Kelly & Nuss and /. E. O’Brien, all of Fond du Lac, and oral argument by Mr. O’Brien.
    
   Per Curiam.

The first contention made by the contestants is that the will is not a natural will merely because it was natural according to Mr. Puls’ standards as found by the court; and, second, that because of the confidential relationship existing between the principal beneficiary and the testator, the burden of proof was shifted to the proponent. These contentions are fully discussed and dealt with in the matter of the Will of Faulks (1945), ante, p. 319, 17 N. W. (2d) 423.

The will is not unnatural. Nephews and nieces had no legal claim upon the testator for support. Their conduct toward him gave them no other claim to his beneficence.

The burden of proof was at all times upon the contestants to establish undue influence by clear and satisfactory evidence. They failed to sustain that burden.

There remain only questions of fact. We have carefully examined the evidence and considered the briefs and arguments of counsel and our conclusion is that the findings of the court are amply sustained. No useful purpose would be .served by a detailed statement of the facts.

Judgment affirmed.  