Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneyappealtestimonyburden of proofprobatewillpower of attorneybeyond a reasonable doubt
willbeyond a reasonable doubt

Related Cases

In re Conservatorship of Brody, 321 Mich.App. 332, 909 N.W.2d 849
View Case »
Matter of Estate of Maheras, 897 P.2d 268, 1995 OK 40
View Case »
Nichols v. Rowan, 422 S.W.2d 21
View Case »
Gifford v. Estate of Gifford, 305 Ark. 46, 805 S.W.2d 71
View Case »
In re Mucci’s Will, 287 N.C. 26, 213 S.E.2d 207
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Darr v. Billeaudeau, 2018 Ark. App. 16, 541 S.W.3d 460

Facts

Stephen Michael Herman executed a will on January 14, 2014, naming Tami Darr, his ex-wife's daughter, as the sole beneficiary. Following Herman's death on April 18, 2014, Darr filed for probate, but his half-sister, Francis Jean Billeaudeau, contested the will, alleging undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity. Evidence presented included Herman's declining health, a diagnosis of dementia, and Darr's actions in procuring the will without informing Herman of her intentions.

The decedent, Stephen Michael Herman, passed away on April 18, 2014, leaving a will that he executed on January 14, 2014, of which Ms. Darr was the sole beneficiary.

Issue

Did Tami Darr procure the will through undue influence, and did she fail to establish the testator's mental capacity at the time of execution?

The court specifically found that Ms. Darr had procured the will.

Rule

The proponent of a will who is a beneficiary and who caused it to be drafted has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not the result of undue influence and that the testator had the mental capacity to make the will.

We have long held, however, that the proponent of a will who is a beneficiary and who drafted the will or 'caused it to be drafted' has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not the result of undue influence and that the testator had the mental capacity to make the will.

Analysis

The court determined that Darr, holding power of attorney, orchestrated the drafting and execution of the will without informing Herman of her actions. The evidence of Herman's mental decline and Darr's financial activities raised a presumption of undue influence, which Darr failed to rebut. The court found that the testimony of witnesses did not sufficiently demonstrate Herman's testamentary capacity at the time of the will's execution.

The court found that Ms. Darr had failed to rebut this presumption.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court's decision to set aside the will and remove Darr as personal representative, concluding that Darr did not meet her burden of proof regarding the validity of the will.

We affirm the circuit court's order.

Who won?

Francis Jean Billeaudeau prevailed in the case because the court found sufficient evidence of undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity, which Darr failed to rebut.

The court specifically found that Ms. Darr had procured the will.

You must be