IN RE ESTATE OF E. E. BROWN, DECEASED
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.
Adult children appealed a probate court's orders confirming their late father's will and denying their petitions to revoke probate based on testamentary incapacity and undue influence, as well as denying a motion to exhume and challenging an award of attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed all orders, finding substantial evidence supported the trial court's findings that the decedent was mentally competent and that no undue influence occurred.
The appellate court affirmed all trial court orders, holding that the trial court did not err in finding testamentary capacity and absence of undue influence, and that the orders regarding exhumation and attorney's fees were fully supported by law and evidence.
“the County Judge in a thorough and extensive order specifically found that the decedent was mentally competent and possessed testamentary capacity at the time of execution of the will of March 20,1961, and of the codicil thereto dated September 6, 1961”
Establishes the trial court's core finding on testamentary capacity that the appellate court upheld.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceE. E. Brown, a 95-year-old pioneer settler of Osceola County, died testate on September 11, 1962. He executed his will on March 20, 1961, and a codici…
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 Mental Competency cases and more on FLexlaw
These three appeals have been consolidated for disposition by this court. F.A.R. 2.2 (a) (2), 31 F.S.A.
Appellants, Ernestine B. Lewis and Curtis E. Brown, seek review of certain orders of the County Judge’s Court of Osceola County entered in connection with the administration of the estate of their late father, Ernest Epps Brown.
E. E. Brown was a pioneer settler of Osceola County who died testate on September 11,1962, at the age of 95 years.
Appellants in Case No. 521 appeal from an order denying their Petition for Revocation of Probate of their father’s will on grounds of mental and physical incompetency and undue influence.
The County Judge in a thorough and extensive order specifically found that the decedent was mentally competent and possessed testamentary capacity at the time of execution of the will of March 20,1961, and of the codicil thereto dated September 6, 1961. The trial court further found that neither instrument was the result of undue influence exercised upon Brown by any person or persons.
It should be noted that the trial of this case consumed a total of 17 days and that the transcript of testimony alone is 2,380 pages in length.
This court has carefully reviewed the entire record, including the numerous exhibits filed therein, and is firmly convinced that appellant has failed to demonstrate any error on the part of the trial court.
It is well settled that the findings of a trial court on questions of fact will not be lightly disturbed on appeal since they are presumed to be correct.
Although the evidence herein is conflicting in certain instances, nevertheless, there is an abundance of substantial competent evidence to support the findings hnd conclusions of the trial judge. Additionally, the record does not support appellant’s contention that the trial court misapplied the law as applicable to the facts and hence the order appealed from should be affirmed.
Case No. 146 seeks review of an order denying appellant’s Motion to Exhume the body of the decedent, and Case No. 777 prays for review of an order awarding attorneys’ fees to the attorneys for the executrix of the estate.
These matters have likewise been reviewed and again we find that the trial judge did not err in his disposition of these matters.
*618Having concluded that the orders appealed from are fully and adequately supported by both the applicable law and the evidence, the same are hereby
Affirmed.
WALDEN, C. J., and ANDREWS, J., and GONZALEZ, JOSE A., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Asgrow-Kilgore Co. v. Mulford Hickerson Corp., 301 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 1974)…’s City, Inc., 265 So. 2d 43 (Fla.1972) ; First Atlantic National Bank v. Cobbett, 82 So. 2d 870 (Fla.1955); In re Baldridge’s Estate, 74 So. 2d 6S8 (Fla.1954); Nixon Const. Co. v. Dover, 218 So. 2d 458 (Fla.App.1st 1969); and In re Estate of Brown, 201 So. 2d 616 (Fla.App. 4th 1967).1 In pertinent part, these cases stand for the proposition that an appellate court must not substitute its judgment of the facts for that of the trier of fact if the latter is supported by competent, substantial evidence. The con…
-
In re Est. OF Luby L. Roberts, Jr. v. Bolton, 367 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…the ruling was correct in accordance with the evidenced wishes of the deceased by oral representations during his lifetime. In Re Baldridge’s Estate, 74 So. 2d 658 (Fla.1954); In Re Thompson’s Estate, 84 So. 2d 911 (Fla.1955); In Re Estate of Brown, 201 So. 2d 616 (Fla.4th DCA 1967); In Re Estate of Wood, supra. Therefore, the order appealed herein is hereby affirmed. Affirmed.…
-
In re Est. of E. E. Brown, 207 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 1967)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 201 So. 2d 616.…