In re Estate of Kinney Kellum Knight v. Esther Helen Knight et al.

Summary

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed a summary judgment sustaining the will of Kinney Kellum Knight against a contest alleging lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, and improper execution. The court affirmed the judgment as to the widow and stepdaughter but reversed it as to the testator's brother, W.E. Knight, because his confidential relationship, active participation in preparing and executing the will, and status as a substantial beneficiary created a presumption of undue influence that could not be resolved by summary judgment. The court also declined to consider newly discovered evidence not presented to the probate court.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment could not be entered in favor of W.E. Knight individually because the evidence showed a confidential relationship, active participation in the preparation and execution of the will, and substantial benefit to W.E. Knight, thereby raising a presumption of undue influence that W.E. Knight bore the burden of overcoming.
2. The summary judgment was properly sustained insofar as it affected the individual interests of Esther Helen Knight and Elissa Aileen Cowart because the contestant failed to establish a ground for revocation of the entire will, and the provisions benefiting them were separable from those benefiting W.E. Knight.
3. The court did not decide whether the will was so permeated by undue influence or fraud upon the court that it should be set aside in its entirety; that issue was left to the probate court if developed through appropriate pleadings and proofs.
4. An appellate court may not consider evidence that was not presented to and considered by the lower court in deciding the matter under review.

Questions Presented

1. Whether summary judgment could sustain the will against the contestant's undue-influence challenge insofar as the will benefited W.E. Knight, who occupied a confidential relation with the testator, participated actively in preparing and executing the will, and was a substantial beneficiary.
2. Whether the evidence established grounds to set aside the will in its entirety or invalidated the provisions benefiting Esther Helen Knight and Elissa Aileen Cowart.
3. Whether the appellate court could consider newly discovered evidence attached to a motion to enlarge the appellate record when that evidence had not been presented to the probate court.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded