COA analyzed the court's charge, which asked the jury to find whether the testator was "of sound mind" or "of unsound mind," without defining unsound mind. When the term ‘sound mind’ is used in connection with the right and power to make and execute wills in Texas its meaning if synonymous with a testator's ‘testamentary capacity’, invariably dependent upon the showing as to whether such person understood and appreciated the consequences of executing the propounded script. COA held no reversible error because unsound mind benefits the appellant when used in its broad and common sense.

Previous will was admissible because it showed a prior state of mind relative to disposition of testator's property and a prior declaration demonstrative of his intent that related to the current issue. It was wholly unnecessary that the trial court give any definition of ‘unsound mind’ or to so instruct the jury that it might readily understand what would amount to a want of testamentary capacity, being necessary only to define ‘testamentary capacity’ or ‘sound mind’. We believe that it would have been better had the trial court instructed the jury to answer the issue submitted by a simple ‘yes' or ‘no’ answer