In re Estate of Butts, 102 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2003, pet. denied).
Contestants allege that Testatrix’s will was the product of undue
influence. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of
Proponents and the appellate court affirmed.
The court began its analysis with a discussion of the elements of undue
influence and the basic principles which apply when a court determines
whether undue influence was exerted. The court then focused on the acts
of each person (Catherine, Evelyn, and Deborah) who allegedly unduly
influenced Testatrix. Contestants admitted that they had no evidence
supporting their allegations against Catherine. Evelyn may have had the
opportunity to exert undue influence but mere opportunity is
insufficient to establish undue influence. Likewise, the fact that she
arranged for a notary and the witnesses for the will did not prove undue
influence, especially since the attorney who prepared the will testified
that Testatrix had capacity and explained the reasons behind the
dispositive provisions of her will. Deborah did not even benefit from
Testatrix’s will and her conduct was consistent with her role as
Testatrix’s friend.
The dissenting justice explained that he believed there was more than a
scintilla of evidence on each of the elements of undue influence and
that according the issue should be decided by a jury.
Moral: A will contestant alleging undue influence must have enough
evidence to raise a fact issue to withstand a proponent’s motion for
summary judgment.