Krueger v. Ary

Summary

The Colorado Supreme Court held that rebuttable presumptions of undue influence and unfairness arising from a fiduciary or confidential relationship do not continue after the opposing party presents legally sufficient rebutting evidence. Although a jury may still infer undue influence and unfairness from the evidence supporting the presumptions, instructing the jury on those permissible inferences is discretionary. The court affirmed the judgment for Ary, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s refusal to give Krueger’s requested instructions.

Holdings

1. Rebuttable presumptions of undue influence and unfairness do not continue in the case after the opposing party presents legally sufficient rebutting evidence. Once rebutted, the presumptions cannot establish the presumed facts as a matter of law.
2. Rebuttable presumptions of undue influence and unfairness shift only the burden of going forward; they do not shift the burden of proof.
3. After a rebuttable presumption has been sufficiently rebutted, the jury may still infer the presumed facts from the evidence that gave rise to the presumption.
4. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to instruct the jury on the rebutted presumptions or on permissible inferences of undue influence and unfairness because the omission did not substantially prejudice Krueger.

Questions Presented

1. Whether rebuttable presumptions of undue influence and unfairness continue after the opposing party presents legally sufficient rebutting evidence.
2. Whether the presumptions shift the burden of proof or only the burden of going forward.
3. Whether a jury may infer undue influence and unfairness from the evidence that gave rise to the rebutted presumptions.
4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to instruct the jury on the rebutted presumptions or the permissible inferences.

Disposition

affirmed