Title: Matter of Will of Polk
Citation: 497 So. 2d 815
Docket Number: 55998
State: Mississippi
Issuer: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date: November 5, 1986

497 So. 2d 815 (1986) In the Matter of the Last WILL &amp; Testament OF Dimple POLK, Deceased. Mrs. Texie LEE v. ESTATE OF Dimple POLK, Deceased. No. 55998. Supreme Court of Mississippi. November 5, 1986. *816 Clarence R. Scales, Scales &amp; Scales, Jackson, for appellant. R.E. Swindoll, Sr., Cotten Ruthven, Waller &amp; Waller, Jackson, for appellee. Before HAWKINS, P.J., and PRATHER and ROBERTSON, JJ. PRATHER, Justice, for the Court: This is an appeal from a judgment of the Chancery Court of Hinds County wherein the chancellor found the last will and testament of Dimple Polk, deceased to be valid. The contestant was the decedent's mother; siblings of the half-blood and decedent's father were made parties. The only appellant here is Mrs. Texie Lee, mother of the deceased, alleging the following as error: The chancellor erred in holding that the purported will of Dimple Polk, deceased, was not procured by undue influence. Dimple Polk, a resident of Jackson, Mississippi died August 1, 1983, leaving an estate valued at $277,000. In a will executed July 8, 1983, Dimple Polk left all her property, real, personal and mixed, to her sister, Dorothy Polk, except for bequests of monetary amounts to half-sisters and half-brothers. The estate of this decedent, a large part, came from oil interests given to the decedent by her father. Dimple and Dorothy Polk were born to Zelus P. Polk and Texie Polk (Lee). The parents divorced when the girls were quite young and Texie Lee remarried having five children in her second marriage. Dorothy Polk married Lawrence Polk and lived in California. Dimple Polk never married and lived and worked in Jackson most of her life. Dimple temporarily moved to California and spent weekends with her sister Dorothy while being treated for emotional depression. During treatment in 1976, Dimple Polk was found to be emotionally stable. The doctor prescribed some relaxants for her but Dimple had not received treatment since 1977. After Dimple moved back to Mississippi, she moved into a home with her mother, paying $35.00 per month room and board. Mrs. Lee sold her home to her son and moved into a home purchased by Dimple. Dimple continued to live with Mrs. Lee until her death over some twenty years. In 1982 Dimple contracted cancer and was in remission, after surgery, until early 1983. In late June, 1983, Dimple visited with her cousin, Dr. Charles Allen in Pascagoula. Dimple frequently confided with Dr. Allen in procuring second opinions on all her medical problems. Dr. Allen recognized that the cancer was no longer in remission and that Dimple had only a short while to live. He called Dimple's sister, Dorothy, in California to inform her about Dimple's conditions. Dorothy Polk arrived in Mississippi on July 4. On July 7, Dimple and Dorothy drove to visit Dr. Allen. While there, Dr. Allen was discussing the execution of his own will with Dimple. Dimple, who knew no attorneys in Jackson (as per Allen's testimony) asked Allen to arrange a meeting with his lawyer to execute her will. Allen called a lawyer with whom he was acquainted. Dorothy, Dr. Allen and Dimple went to her office. Dr. Allen waited at the secretary's office, but Dimple asked that Dorothy sit in the room with her while talking to the attorney. According to the attorney and Dorothy, Dorothy was not involved in the conversation concerning the bequests and only at one point did Dorothy ask from *817 where she would get the cash to pay the bequests. The attorney, another witness, and Dimple executed the will in the privacy of the attorney's office. The attorney testified that Dimple demonstrated no signs of illness or mental incapacity at the time. Dimple and her sister Dorothy returned to Jackson; Dorothy had possession of the will. Sometime thereafter, Dimple and Dorothy obtained access to most of Dimple's insurance policies and accounts in order to place Dorothy's signatures on those documents. Although Dimple returned to work for a few hours a day until July 12th, her health deteriorated. She went into the hospital on July 31st and died on August 1st. At trial, testimony revealed that several friends and members of Dimple's family knew about the will and had encouraged Dimple to make a will. The testimony of several witnesses indicated the will was drafted just as Dimple specified. All witnesses at trial including contestants of the will, indicated that Dimple was alert and in full control of her thoughts until the time of her death. Did the chancellor err in holding that the purported will of Dimple Polk, deceased, dated July 8, 1983, was not procured by undue influence? The Mississippi law on fiduciary and confidential relationships is summarized in the decision of Murray v. Laird, 446 So. 2d 575 (1984), at page 578, as follows: The Murray case involved a case in which the trial court properly found as a fact the existence of a confidential relationship. The instant case factually represents the opposite conclusion. No fiduciary relationship is charged, but it is alleged that the sister Dorothy and the decedent were in a confidential relationship. The chancellor found otherwise stating that the trip to Pascagoula would have been the only occasion when Dimple's sister could have exerted such alleged undue influence. The chancellor noted that other relatives could have had influence on the decedent, but that they did not. The chancellor stated: The only evidence relied upon to support the allegation of a confidential relationship is the fact that (1) the beneficiary and decedent were sisters of the whole-blood, and (2) the two sisters took a trip together to Pascagoula. Looking to the existence of a family relationship, the mere fact that a family relationship exists does not give rise to a confidential relationship. It is true that a confidential relationship may be of a legal, moral, domestic, or personal basis. Murray v. Laird, supra. But it is the dominant, overmastering influence over the dependent party, justifiably reposed, that gives rise to a presumption of undue influence. In Re Will &amp; Estate of Varvaris, 477 So. 2d 273, 278 (Miss. 1985); See also Murray v. Laird, 446 So. 2d 575 (Miss. 1984); Harris v. Sellers, 446 So. 2d 1012 (Miss. 1984). Regarding the second circumstance, the trip to Pascagoula, the record reflects that the two sisters went to visit a relative and his new wife, not to make a will; that it was the relative who urged the execution of the will; that the relative did not benefit personally from this suggestion. Other friends and relatives substantiated that the decedent's expressed intent was in keeping with the terms of the will. This Court concludes that the chancellor was correct in finding no circumstances to prove confidential relationship. It therefore follows that without the establishment of a confidential relationship, there is no presumption of undue influence. Nor was there proof of undue influence absent a confidential relationship. A chancellor's finding of fact on a controverted issue may not be set aside or disturbed on appeal unless it is evident from the record that he is manifestly wrong. Spain v. Holland, 483 So. 2d 318 (Miss. 1986); Mathews Brake Hunting &amp; Fishing Club, Inc. v. Sneed, 475 So. 2d 811 (Miss. 1985). It appears that there was substantial evidence supporting the chancellor's finding of fact and that it should not be disturbed on appeal. This case is affirmed. AFFIRMED. WALKER, C.J., ROY NOBLE LEE and HAWKINS, P.JJ., and DAN M. LEE, ROBERTSON, SULLIVAN, ANDERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.