GEORGE J. SHAMAS, MICHAEL J. SHAMAS, AND REBECCA KREED SHAMAS, APPELLANTS,
v.
DORTHEA E. RITTER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HELEN V. CURRY, DECEASED AND JOSEPH F. JENNINGS, GUARDIAN AD LITEM OF JOSEPH COLEY RITTER, A MINOR BENEFICIARY, APPELLEES
GEORGE J. SHAMAS, MICHAEL J. SHAMAS, AND REBECCA KREED SHAMAS, APPELLANTS,
DORTHEA E. RITTER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HELEN V. CURRY, DECEASED AND JOSEPH F. JENNINGS, GUARDIAN AD LITEM OF JOSEPH COLEY RITTER, A MINOR BENEFICIARY, APPELLEES
432 So. 2d 128
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1983)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The trial court’s findings that appellee overcame the presumption of undue influence by coming forward with a reasonable explanation for her active role in the testatrix’s affairs, especially in the preparation of a new will, is supported by competent and substantial evidence and thus, will not be disturbed. See In re Estate of Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla.1971); In re Estate of Blakey, 363 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dorothea E. Ritter v. Curry, 452 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…of a disputed transaction was not inadmissible under any rule of law. Reversed and remanded for a new trial. . The final will of November, 1980, which was admitted to probate, was the subject of a prior appeal before this court, Shamas v. Ritter, 432 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 440 So. 2d 353 (Fla.1983), in which Shamas challenged the validity of the will based on undue influence. The facts set forth in the briefs of that case indicate that under the new will the members of the Shamas family, in…
Authorities Cited
- In re Est. of Coketine Bray Carpenter v. Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1971)
- In re the Est. of Elizabeth W. Blakey v. Flagship First Nat'l Bank, 363 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)