LUCY K. GORMAN, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM MATTHEW WICKHAM, AND LUCY K. GORMAN AND JERRY J. GORMAN, CO-TRUSTEES UNDER WILLIAM MATTHEW WICKHAM REVOCABLE TRUST, APPELLANTS,
v.
MARY ELLEN HARRISON, COLLEEN SPARKS, THOMAS J. PORTER, LUCILLE W. WATT AND MARTHA BROWN, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Lucy Gorman, as personal representative of William Matthew Wickham's estate and co-trustee of his revocable trust, appealed a trial court judgment finding undue influence in various testamentary and non-testamentary instruments she procured. The appellate court affirmed, holding that substantial evidence supported a presumption of undue influence and that Gorman failed to provide a reasonable explanation for her active role.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that substantial evidence supported a presumption of undue influence based on Gorman's status as a substantial beneficiary, her confidential relationship with the decedent, and her active role in procuring the instruments. Gorman failed to meet her burden of providing a reasonable explanation for her active role.
[1] A presumption of undue influence arises when a substantial beneficiary or donee occupies a confidential relationship with the decedent and is active in procuring the cont…
[2] When a presumption of undue influence arises, the burden shifts to the beneficiary or donee to provide a reasonable explanation for their active role in the decedent's af…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A presumption of undue influence arises when a substantial beneficiary under a will or a donee of an inter vivos gift, occupies a confidential relationship with the decedent and is active in procuring the contested will or gift.”
Establishes the legal standard for triggering the presumption of undue influence
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLucy Gorman, a substantial beneficiary under various instruments, occupied a confidential relationship with decedent William Matthew Wickham and was a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Burden Of Proof Shifting cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, Lucy K. Gorman, Personal Representative of the Estate of William Matthew Wickham, and Lucy K. Gorman and Jerry J. Gorman, Co-Trustees under William Matthew Wickham’s Revocable Trust, appeal a final judgment in favor of appellees, Mary Ellen Harrison, Colleen Sparks, Thomas J. Porter, Lucille W. Watt, and Martha Brown. The final judgment in favor of appellees was on appellees’ claims of undue influence arising from Lucy Gor-man’s actively procuring the decedent, Wickham, to execute various wills, a trust, a codicil to a will, a warranty deed, and a power of attorney. We affirm.
We find there was substantial evidence to support a presumption of undue influence. A presumption of undue influence arises when a substantial beneficiary under a will or a donee of an inter vivos gift, occupies a confidential relationship with the decedent and is active in procuring the contested will or gift. Cripe v. Atlantic First National Bank of Daytona Beach, 422 So. 2d 820 (Fla.1982); In re Estate of Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla.1971); Fogel v. Swann, 523 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 534 So. 2d 399 (Fla.1988). In this case the record demonstrates that Lucy Gorman was a substantial beneficiary or donee under the various instruments. Lucy Gorman also occupied a confidential relationship with the decedent and was active in procuring the contested instruments.
Where a presumption of undue influence arises, the burden shifts to the beneficiary or the donee to come forward with a “reasonable explanation for his or her active role in the decedent’s affairs, and, specifically, in the preparation” of the contested instruments. In re Estate of Carpenter, 253 So. 2d at 704; Sun Bank/Miami, N.A. v. Hogarth, 536 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), review denied, 545 So. 2d 1369 (Fla.1989); Fogel v. Swann, 523 So. 2d at 1229. We agree with the trial court that appellants failed to offer a reasonable explanation for Lucy Gorman’s active role in the decedent’s affairs, especially her activities concerning the preparation of the contested instruments.
Accordingly, the final judgment of the trial court declaring the above instruments null and void, as well as nullifying the other acts performed by Lucy Gorman under the power of attorney, is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Divella v. Divella, 626 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…r Divella and Diana Hoffman, failed to overcome the presumption of undue influence. See In re Estate of Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla.1971). As a result, the account transfer which was procured by the appellees is null and void. Gorman v. Harrison, 559 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). The trial court correctly ordered each party to pay their own attorney’s fees. The petition filed by Roger Divella and Diana Hoffman was not a claim against Robert Divella, as the personal representative of the estate. The liti…
Authorities Cited
- In re Est. of Coketine Bray Carpenter v. Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1971)
- Cripe v. Atl. First Nat'l Bank OF Daytona Beach, 422 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1982)
- SUN Bank/Miami, N.A. v. Hogarth, 536 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Fogel v. Richard H.M. Swann and Norma P. Swann, 523 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)