CHRIS PAVLIDES, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF PAULINE PAPPAS, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
v.
ELEFTHERIA ROUSSIS, JOHN ROUSSIS AND KOULA SIMONSON, 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.
The court held that the probate court's findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding undue influence were not supported by competent substantial evidence.
The probate court set aside a 1993 will, finding it was a product of undue influence, and established a 1991 will and 1993 codicil as the true last wi…
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 Will Contest cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Chris Pavlides, as personal representative of the estate of Pauline Pappas, deceased, appeals the final judgment entered by the probate court. We reverse.
As reflected in the final judgment which is the subject of this appeal, the probate court set aside an October 4, 1993, last will and testament of Ms. Pappas as a product of undue influence. The probate court established a 1991 last will and testament and a 1993 codicil 'as Ms. Pappas’ true last will and testament.
When there is a challenge to a will on the grounds of undue influence, there are several factors to be considered. These factors have been set forth in the supreme court case of In re Carpenter’s Estate, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla.1971). Upon appellate review, this court is not to interfere with the findings of fact or conclusions of law of a probate court unless there is an absence of substantial competent evidence to support those findings, or the probate court has misapprehended the legal effect of the evidence as a whole. See In re Zimmerman’s Estate, 84 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla.1956); In re Estate of Witt, 139 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962).
After a careful review of the entire record, we conclude that the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the final judgment are not supported by competent substantial evidence. Accordingly, the final judgment is reversed and the probate court is ordered to admit to probate the October 4, 1993, last will and testament of Ms. Pappas.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
BLUE, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Derovanesian v. Derovanesian, 857 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…d family members, and we are unwilling to thwart the dis-positional intent she so clearly evidenced to her attorney and in her will. Langford, 552 So. 2d at 968-969. See In re Estate of Flohl, 764 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Pavlides v. Roussis, 764 So. 2d 769 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Raimi v. Furlong, 702 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), review denied, 717 So. 2d 531 (Fla.1998); Mulato v. Mulato, 705 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), review denied, 717 So. 2d 535 (Fla.1998); Ballard v. Ballard, 549 So. 2d 1176 (F…
Authorities Cited
- In re Est. of Coketine Bray Carpenter v. Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1971)
- In re Est. of Wm. F. Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 84 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 1956)
- In re Est. of Wilma Lucille Witt v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Clearwater, 139 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)