ÿWPC¨ E‡x…"nåÏöù4vwÇ|%á5Iô0¶e@&œ,+DS`t9‡z DõëÒ RýÛ°ŒoVQ5<7ß8ÎÂËÈk¸ž©Û¢trÚuý1R oµmW0ÓnÑ;ÒÛ¦uÕ¡ë_eý 9ד]Þ Õ»Š³ÏeÒ‰ÃR+说IJ¯Ý}îz%6½Aú •Rý‚ØÎw…¢¯Röâa¯ßEb4J€ÎŸ¨ú¦‡äÞñÇVöaRëvCψq㤩dgZ$OSnŽp“i 6ò‡ <‘–r×Þnµ—‚@èƒBdo5)µæ0æ öñªãÑæð”iÃY½½lKyTv™j•ô˜щv6—>%‚àAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌó óÌÌÌBETTY€JEAN€STREET,à < àà ” àà ì à)€C/A€NO.€03A01„9710„CV„00488Ð   Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)Ìà 4 àPlaintiff„Appellant,à < àà ” àà ì à)€WASHINGTON€CIRCUITÐ  Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)Ìv.à 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)€HON.€THOMAS€J.€SEELEY,€JR.,Ð   Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)€JUDGEÌROBERT€L.€WADDELL,€GARY€à ì à)Ð   ÐWALTERS,€TRUSTEES€OF€SALEMà ì à)Ð   ÐPRESBYTERIAN€CHURCH,€à ” àà ì à)Ð  ÐTRUSTEES€OF€SALEM€à < àà ” àà ì à)Ð  ÐPRESBYTERIAN€CEMETERY€FUND,à ì à)Ð  ÐRANDY€HURST€and€RUTH€à ” àà ì à)Ð  ÐTRIVETTE€BRAY,à ä àà < àà ” àà ì àœ)€AFFIRMED›Ð  Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àœ)€AND›Ìà 4 àDefendants„Appellees.à ” àà ì àœ)€REMANDED›Ð  ÐÌÌÌBOB€McD.€GREEN,€Johnson€City,€for€Plaintiff„Appellant.ÌÌM.€STANLEY€GIVENS€and€JACK€R.€CARRIER,€Johnson€City,€for€Defendants„¼Appellees.ÌÌÌÌÌà@%‚àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óˆÐ '  ÐÌÌà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àFranks,€J.ÌÌÌÌÓÓÔ‡ŠT[ŠŠŠ„½Ôà 4 àà Œ àIn€this€will€contest€case,€the€Trial€Judge€upheld€a€will€without€a€jury,€andÐ .þ&' Ðthe€contestant€has€appealed.Ìà 4 àà Œ à€Edith€Trivette,€executed€three€separate€wills€over€a€period€ofÏapproximately€three€years.€€The€last€will€was€executed€on€August€31,€1994,€andÏdevised€$1,000.00€to€the€Salem€Presbyterian€Church€in€Washington€County€and€aÏdiamond€engagement€ring€to€her€stepdaughter,€Ruth€Trivette€Bray.€€It€then€divided€theÏremainder€of€the€estate€equally€between€Robert€L.€Waddell,€Betty€Jean€Street,€and€theÐ 6:.33ýO ÐSalem€Presbyterian€Church€Cemetery€Fund.€€Robert€L.€Waddell,€as€Executor,€causedÏthe€will€to€be€probated,€and€ultimately€distributed€the€estate€in€accordance€with€theÏwill.€Some€five€months€after€distribution€of€the€estate,€Betty€Jean€Street,€who€hadÏreceived€$46,762.27€from€the€estate,€filed€a€petition€to€contest€the€will,€and€upon€anÏextended€trial,€the€Trial€Court€ruled€against€the€contestant.€€œÌà 4 àà Œ àAt›€trial,€the€contestant€offered€the€deposition€of€Dr.€Ralph€Lee€Mills€inÏevidence€to€the€effect€that€Trivette€suffered€from€senile€dementia.€The€doctor€testifiedÏthat€he€had€treated€Trivette€from€1988€through€1992,€and€that€ð ðslowly€over€the€courseÏof€time€when€I€began€treating€her,€she€slowly€developed€progressively€worseÏdementia.ðð€€Dr.€Mills€did€not€see€Trivette€in€1993€or€1994,€although€he€expected€thatÏher€mental€and€emotional€condition€would€have€deteriorated€during€that€time.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àThe€contestant,€on€appeal,€insists€that€the€burden€of€proof€ofÏtestamentary€capacity€shifted€from€the€contestant€to€the€proponent€of€the€will€uponÏproof€of€a€serious€permanent€mental€impairment.Ìà 4 àà Œ àIn€this€regard,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€said:€€Ô#†Š„½ŠŠŠT[$ #ÔÔ‡ŠT[ŠŠŠ„½Ôð ðWhile€evidenceÐ x#p Ðregarding€factors€such€as€physical€weakness€or€disease,€old€age,€blunt€perception€orÏòòfailing€mind€and€memoryóó€is€admissible€on€the€issue€of€testamentary€capacity,€it€is€notÐ ˆ'€  Ðconclusive€and€the€testator€is€not€thereby€rendered€incompetent€if€her€mind€isÏsufficiently€sound€to€enable€her€to€know€and€understand€what€she€is€doing.ðð€€òòIn€reÐ ˜+$$ ÐEstate€of€Elamóó,€738€S.W.2d€169,€171„2€(Tenn.€1987)€(òòciting€American€Trust€&Ð  -˜&& ÐBanking€Co.€v.€Williams,€óó32€Tenn.€App.€590,€225€S.W.2d€79,€83€œ(1948)ñ%ñ.ñ%ññ&ñ€(emphasisÐ ¨/ (( Ðsuppliedñ&ññ'ññ&ñ)ñ&ññ'ññ(ñ.)ñ(ñ›Ìà 4 àà Œ àThis€Court,€in€the€òòAmerican€Trust€&€Banking€Co.€óócase€observed:Ð ¸3°,, ÐÓÓà0 4 àà0Œ 4(#4(#àEvidence€of€prior€mental€condition€may€have€much,€little€or€noÏprobative€value€depending€upon€the€nature€and€effect€of€the€malady,Ïwhether€general,€habitual,€continuous,€chronic€or€progressive€or€dueÏmerely€to€temporary,€superficial,€accidental,€occasional€or€intermittentÏcauses€or€conditions.€€If€the€debility€falls€within€the€first€category,Ð Ð9È22 Ðevidence€of€the€testatorððs€condition€at€a€time€other€that€the€date€of€theÏexecution€of€the€will€may€shift€the€burden€of€proof€and€require€theÏproduction€of€affirmative€proof€of€his€condition€at€the€very€time€the€willÏwas€executed.Ð Œ (#Œ (# ÐÌÓ:Ó225€S.W.2d€at€84.€Ìà 4 àà Œ àœIn€this€regard,€òòGreen›€v.€Higdon,óó€870€S.W.2d€513€(Tenn.€App.€1993),Ð $ Ðconsidered€the€impact€of€the€deposition€of€a€Dr.€Kaplan€offered€by€the€contestant€of€aÏwill.€€The€doctor€testified€ð ðHis€niece€tells€me€heððs€been€confused€for€more€than€a€year.€ÏOn€examination€he€was€obviously€disoriented.€€He€obviously€has€an€organic€mentalÏstate.€€In€view€of€the€history,€itððs€likely€that€he€has€senile€dementia.€€I€donððt€think€he€isÏcapable€of€looking€after€his€own€affairs€as€long€as€this€present€mental€state€detentionÏcontinues.€.€.€My€conclusion€is€that€he€must€have€had€this€primary€dementiaÏAlzheimerððs€Disease€for€œsñ)ñañ)ññ*ñoñ*ñme›€years.€€The€exact€number€of€years,€I€couldnððt€be€certainÏof.€€Based€on€my€observations€œoñ(ñ›ñ(ñf›€him€since€1982,€I€conclude€that€his€inability€toÏhandle€his€business€affairs€date€back€at€least€a€year.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€522.Ð l d Ðà 4 àà Œ àUpon€considering€œDr.€Kaplanððs€testimony,›€this€Court€said€ð ðNoÏtestimony€is€found€that,€on€January€18,€1985,€the€deceased€lacked€testamentaryÏcapacity.€€No€evidence€is€found€of€any€speech€or€action€of€deceased€from€which€a€juryÏcould€properly€find€such€lack€of€capacity.ðð€€òòId.€€óóThe€Court€then€noted,€ð ðLess€mentalÐ Œ(„!! Ðcapacity€is€required€to€make€a€will€than€to€carry€on€business€transactions€generally,ððÏand€then€stated,€ð ðit€is€clear€that€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Kaplan,€quoted€above,€is€notÏsufficient€to€justify€a€finding€as€a€matter€of€law€that€the€deceased€was€incompetent€toÏmake€a€will€at€any€time.€Ìà 4 àà Œ àWe€conclude€that€the€contestantððs€evidence€did€not€shift€the€burden€ofÏproof€of€testamentary€capacity,€but€in€any€event,€the€proponent€put€forth€sufficientÏevidence€of€testamentary€capacity€at€the€time€of€the€execution€of€the€will€to€rebut€anyÏpresumption€of€incapacity€that€could€have€arisen.€€Ð Ì8Ä11 Ðà 4 àà Œ àThe€contestant€further€argues€that€she€offered€proof€of€physicalÏimpairment€of€Trivetteððs€vision€and€hearing,€and€that€the€proponents€failed€to€show€byÏa€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€Trivette€was€familiar€with€the€precise€provisionsÏœof›€ñ(ñœñ(ñœthe›€will€œat€the€time€of€execution.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àWhere›€the€maker€of€the€will€is€aged,€sick€and€infirm€or€unable€to€readÏand€write€by€reason€of€blindness€or€illiteracy,€the€proponent€of€the€will€is€oneratedÏwith€the€burden€of€showing€the€testator€comprehended€the€contents€of€the€will€at€theÏtime€of€execution.€€òòBurrows€v.€Lewisóó,€24€Tenn.€App.€253,€142€S.W.2d€758,€763Ð @8 Ð(1940).€€We€agree€with€the€contestant€that€the€proponent€had€the€burden€of€provingÏthat€Trivette€knew€the€contents€of€the€will.€€We€conclude€that€this€burden€was€met€by€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence.€€T.R.A.P.€Rule€13(d).Ìà 4 àà Œ àÔ#†ŠàHŠŠŠàHô#ÔGene€Gaby,€the€attorney€who€prepared€the€will,€testified€that€he€metÐ `X Ðwith€Trivette€on€June€13,€1994€and€she€expressly€informed€him€then€of€what€sheÏwanted€in€her€will.€€He€was€satisfied€that€Ms.€Trivette€knew€what€property€she€had€andÏthe€disposition€she€wanted€to€make€of€it,€and€he€prepared€the€will€accordingly.€€WhenÏGaby€met€with€Trivette€for€execution€of€the€will€on€June€24,€1994,€he€reviewed€theÏwill€with€her,€although€he€could€not€remember€whether€he€read€it€to€her,€whetherÏsomeone€else€read€it,€or€whether€Ms.€Trivette€read€it.€€He€was€certain€that€one€of€theÏthree€took€place.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àGaby€then€went€back€to€the€nursing€home€on€August€31,€1994,€and€wentÏover€the€œlast€will›€with€Ms.€Trivette,€to€the€extent€that€he€considered€she€knew€what€sheÏwas€signing.€€A€Ms.€Gammon€was€present€when€this€final€will,€upheld€by€the€Court,Ïwas€executed,€and€she€remembers€Trivette€discussing€the€will€with€her€attorney.€ÏAlthough€Gammon€could€not€remember€whether€the€entire€will€was€read€aloud,€sheÏtestified€that€at€least€part€of€it€was€read,€and€Trivette€told€Gaby€she€understood€whatÏshe€was€doing€in€the€will.€€œÐ Ð9È22 Ðà 4 àà Œ àThe›€contestant€argues€that€Trivette€could€not€have€known€the€provisionsÏin€this€latter€will,€because€œcontestant€contends€that›€this€will€essentially€resurrected€theÏprovisions€contained€in€her€ð ðfirst€willðð.€€There€is€simply€no€proof€in€the€record€thatÏTrivette€was€attempting€to€resurrect€the€provisions€from€the€first€will.€€The€evidenceÏestablishes€by€a€preponderance€that€Trivette€was€familiar€with€the€specific€provisionsÏin€both€the€second€and€third€wills€which€she€executed€in€June€and€August€of€1994.€ÏThe€issue€thus€becomes€whether€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€Trial€CourtððsÏfinding€the€will€valid.Ìà 4 àà Œ àThe€Trial€Court€œheld›€that€the€will€dated€August€31,€1994,€was€the€lastÏwill€and€testament€of€Edith€œTrivette.€The›€standard€of€review€in€a€case€tried€without€aÏjury€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€of€the€Trial€Court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€ofÐ XP Ðcorrectness€of€the€finding,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€ÏT.R.A.P.€Rule€13(d).€€œÌà 4 àà Œ àThe›€contestant€offered€evidence€that€Trivette€had€been€diagnosed€withÏsenile€dementia€in€1991,€and€that€such€condition€worsens€with€time.€€She€introducedÏseveral€hospital€and€nursing€home€documents€indicating€that€Trivette€was€confusedÏand€disoriented€at€times.€€She€also€offered€evidence€of€Trivetteððs€unusual€behavior,Ïand€to€being€confused€as€to€œwhom›€people€were€and€œforgetññful.ñññ ñting›€things.ñ ñ›€€She€offered€evidenceÏthat€Trivette€had€good€days€and€bad€days,€but€did€œñ!ñshe€ñ!ñnot›€offer€any€evidence€as€toÏTrivetteððs€capacity€on€the€specific€day€of€the€execution€of€the€will.Ìà 4 àà Œ àThe€proponent,€on€the€other€hand,€offered€evidence€from€fiveÏdisinterested€persons,€that€Trivette€had€the€requisite€capacity€to€make€a€valid€will.€€TheÏattorney€Gaby€testified€that€Trivette€informed€him€of€what€she€wanted€in€the€will.€€SheÏknew€what€property€she€had€and€how€she€wanted€it€divided.€€Other€witnesses,Ïincluding€staff€members€at€the€nursing€home,€testified€to€their€opinions€that€TrivetteÏpossessed€the€requisite€capacity€to€make€a€will.Ð Ð9È22 Ðà 4 àà Œ àThe€proponents€presented€documentary€evidence€that€Trivette€was€alertÏand€oriented€as€to€time€and€place,€and€a€psychologist€did€find€that€Trivette€would€getÏconfused€at€times,€but€she€would€correct€herself€when€that€happened.€€The€recordsÏreveal€that€Trivette€scored€below€the€range€for€dementia€on€a€test€given€by€theÏpsychologist.€€The€evidence€preponderates€that€Trivette€was€competent€to€make€theÏwill€upheld€by€the€Trial€Judge.Ìà 4 àà Œ àFurther,€the€Trial€Court€correctly€found€that€there€was€no€evidence€ofÏundue€influence€upon€Trivette.€€The€contestant€offered€no€proof€of€a€confidentialÏrelationship€between€Trivette€and€anyone.€€Nor€was€evidence€offered€of€anyÏsuspicious€circumstances€warranting€the€conclusion€the€will€was€not€Trivetteððs€freeÏand€independent€act.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àThe€evidence€preponderates€in€favor€of€the€Trial€Courtððs€judgment,Ïwhich€we€affirm,€and€remand€the€cause€with€cost€of€the€appeal€assessed€to€theÏappellant.ÌÓÓÌÌœñ"ñÌ›Ìñ"ñ›à@‚‚+‚àòòˆà D àÐ €%x Ðóóà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à__________________________Ð „&| Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌœñ#ñÌñ#ñ›Ì___________________________ÌHouston€M.€Goddard,€P.J.ÌÌœñ$ñÌñ$ñ›ÌÌÌ___________________________ÌCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€J.Ì