花都影视

Kinchen v. A.R. May, Etc., 8th Dist. No. 100672, 2014-Ohio-3325. The plaintiff appealed the trial court’s decision granting summary judgment to the defendant as to her undue influence claim and the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint to include a claim for reformation of the trust under R.C. § 5804.15. The Eighth District upheld the probate court’s holding that the trust amendment was not invalid as a product of undue influence and that the decedent possessed the capacity to execute the document. The appellate court stated that undue influence must be actually exerted on the mind of the testator with respect to the execution of the document in question and so overpower the testator’s mind as to destroy his free agency and make the testator express another’s will rather than the testator’s own. The appellate court also stated that testamentary capacity exists when the testator sufficiently understands the nature of the business in which he is engaged, comprehends the nature and the extent of his property, knows the names and the identities of those who could inherit, and appreciates his relation to the members of his family at the time of the document’s execution. It was not enough that the plaintiff submitted an unsupported, self-serving affidavit detailing the plaintiff’s own observations of the decedent in support of her claims if these observations did not occur around the time the testamentary documents were executed. Additionally, because the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of support for new matters sought to pleaded, the probate court acted within in its discretion to deny plaintiff’s motion to amend the pleading. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.