In the Matter Of: the Purported Will of Karl Arthur Andrews

Summary

The court held that the caveator presented sufficient circumstantial evidence of undue influence to require submission of the will contest to the jury. Although no individual circumstance was independently sufficient, the evidence collectively could support a finding that the testator's 1974 will and 1975 codicil resulted from an influence that overcame his free agency. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the verdict and judgment for the caveator.