Estate of Minor v. Minor
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-00442-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-10-2006 Opinion Author: Griffis, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wills & estates - Presumption of undue influence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WILLS, TRUSTS AND ESTATES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-03-2004 Appealed from: Wilkinson County Chancery Court Judge: George Ward Disposition: CHANCERY COURT ENTERED JUDGMENT FOR APPELLEE Case Number: 2001-232 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | In the Matter of The Estate of Samuel B. Minor, Deceased: Tony Trask and Ethel Young |
DAVID S. CRAWFORD, RON SENKO |
||
| Appellee: | Halla Minor, Jr., Executor of The Last Will and Testament of Samuel B. Minor | HOLMES STURGEON |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wills & estates - Presumption of undue influence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Tony Trask and Ethel Young filed a petition to establish paternity and to contest the Last Will and Testament of Samuel Minor. They alleged the will was void due to Halla Minor, Jr.’s undue influence. The chancellor upheld the will, and Trask and Young appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Trask and Young argue that Halla did not meet the clear and convincing burden of proof to overcome the presumption of undue influence, because their evidence was more credible. A presumption of undue influence arises when there is a confidential relationship, and the fiduciary took some active part in getting the will written. In order for Halla to overcome the presumption, he must show that he exhibited good faith in the fiduciary relationship with Judge Minor; Judge Minor acted with knowledge and deliberation when he executed his will, and Judge Minor exhibited independent consent and action. Halla testified that it was Judge Minor’s idea to visit the attorney, and Halla did not know why. The attorney testified it was Judge Minor who approached him about drafting his will. Halla was outside working when the will was signed. The fees for the will and power of attorney were paid together at $327. Judge Minor paid the fees. The will execution was quite open, as it was in the middle of the day, in Judge Minor’s living room, in front of three witnesses, none of whom were beneficiaries. There was substantial credible evidence to support the chancellor’s finding that Halla acted in good faith. The attorney testified that Judge Minor knew he owned a main house and a smaller house. Judge Minor accurately recounted that he had $2,500 in his bedroom. He knew of his checking account at Commercial Bank. Judge Minor understood the new will was disinheriting several people out of land. He provided for five of those people to be given cash. The testimony was that Judge Minor was in charge of his finances and business. Judge Minor made the decision to have Halla added as a signatory on his account. Halla never exercised this power unless instructed by Judge Minor. It was Judge Minor’s decision to give Halla power of attorney. Halla never acted on his power of attorney. There was substantial credible evidence to support the chancellor’s finding that Judge Minor acted with knowledge and deliberation when the will was executed. Several witnesses testified that Judge Minor was an intelligent, sharp and strong-willed individual, and this never changed despite his age. Judge Minor initiated the new will, without telling Halla. Thus, there was substantial credible evidence to support the chancellor’s finding that Halla overcame the presumption of undue influence by clear and convincing evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
