Court Opinion

ID: 9594438
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:29:58.492997+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:17.375197
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(specially concurring).
I agree with the majority opinion in this case because it follows the “well-settled law ... that a confidential relationship exists whenever a decedent places trust and confidence in the integrity and fidelity of another.” Till, 458 N.W.2d at 529 (Sabers, J., dissenting). In defense of the trial court, I can understand an over-reaction to the majority’s holding in Till, which reversed a trial court’s finding of confidential relationship despite 41 explicit findings of fact and 11 conclusions of law. Id. at 528. It is too late to reverse the effect of the majority’s decision in Till, but this case goes a long way to correctly overrule the Till holding as precedent.