In re Estate of Vackar, 345 S.W.3d 588 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, no pet.).
Brother executed a will after a serious accident leaving all of his
property to Sister and omitting his Wife and Son, both from whom he was
estranged. After Brother’s death, Wife and Son contested the validity of
Brother’s will leaving his entire estate to Sister and naming Sister as
his agent under a durable power of attorney. The jury found that Brother
lacked testamentary capacity and Sister appealed.
The appellate court reversed. The court first addressed the issue of
whether certain medical records which could have supported the finding
of lack of capacity were properly admitted into evidence. Because the
proper predicate was not laid, these records could not support the
jury’s finding but that one record could be considered because Sister
waived her objection. The court then examined the other evidence and
found that it was insufficient to support a finding of lack of capacity
and that the jury’s finding otherwise was against the great weight and
preponderance of the evidence. Instead, the evidence showed that Brother
had capacity when he executed his will and durable power of attorney.
Moral: Although difficult to do, it is possible to overturn a jury
finding of lack of capacity on appeal if the evidence upon which the
jury relied was extremely weak.
Sister was named as the beneficiary of Brother’s life insurance
policy. Because the policy was purchased with community property, both
the trial and appellate courts held that the gift was unfair even though
Brother and Wife had been living apart and estranged for many years. “A
surviving spouse establishes a prima facie case of constructive fraud on
the community with proof that the life insurance policy was purchased
with community funds for the benefit of a person outside the community.”
Vackar at 598. To determine whether the gift was fair, the court
considered “(1) the size of the gift in relation to the total size of
the community estate; (2) the adequacy of the estate remaining to
support the surviving spouse in spite of the gift; (3) the relationship
of the donor to the donee; and (4) whether special circumstances existed
to justify the gift.” Vackar at 598.
Moral: When a spouse names a non-spouse as the beneficiary of a life
insurance policy purchased with community funds, the other spouse’s
consent should be obtained to prevent claims that the beneficiary
designation is unfair.