Estate of Danford, 550 S.W.3d 275 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.).
Contestants claimed that Decedent’s will was
invalid on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity and undue
influence. The trial court issued a summary judgment in favor of
Proponent and Contestants appealed.
The appellate court reversed. The court examined
the record and determined that there were fact issues making the summary
judgment improper that Decedent has testamentary capacity. For example,
none of the people with Decedent at the time of will execution indicated
that Decedent knew she was signing a will, understood the effect of
making a will, was aware of the general nature of her property, or knew
the identity of her next of kin.
With regard to the undue influence claim, the court
focused on the fact that Proponent of the will who was a beneficiary
thereunder was also named as Decedent’s agent under a durable power of
attorney. This caused the burden of proof to shift to Proponent to show
the fairness of the transaction and lack of undue influence.
Moral: A summary judgment of testamentary
capacity or lack of undue influence is hard to uphold on appeal as any
fact issue is likely to cause the appellate court to reverse.