ÿWPC’ ý‡\²+¡Øy½ò•O!ŒÝy÷ØÙ=<Ø`Ò£¬.º§dæ὆?(K¨ßâBij!¼óì ø˜âÜN])ý¸+—0=R½öÖ  8ª2ƒ„~+’~„{“ÅL¡CÃ3ÖàìðÍ3ã}Êà­Ç„ôŠÁÿÐc²Œ§ùDöàJ%æ_„NjÌÖ¾ëèõIÔ{9÷h:$-[#ÕvÕ¿x¶Du¬2‰¬c¶Wä’ Â’í??=€A!oá“u=л¿ËÑðéh'‚óàŒQ å«Ð½¯ø6„šÑ …â³ úÊ85rÅÉNNr0mr·!HTUÆØ{8ëåI:ì” z§xÄ,S¼¡RL-"­Â«í!y|µO bò…dçgÃe×¼~EÏFÝÇPͦ¥ç¤ïc¤8N‘yŽ2–}šx‘¢&wª€=[ér-£Oƒ AÒg X¬>´*u¾a›Ÿ ÖVe=(Öé¦ï`G¹"ì„oŸ‡á¦4)ùGˆžùY_ ÕΕM–b÷âÙé1JÚÃ(ÀzªúŽ –¿ž¬f¯W<ß7›Ik Ð…yÖ‹²O¶qÞ¹•„%³àÁƒÈj¥C”‹Ê¨øË%\2Ò:ª:OÄx†ÚT‹ðÔnÍæ²Øè{Þ0øÓb#Á\ % U@# 0ˆc U Në ^ 9 wE zI Òà 4• © ¸ mº ÆÑ Æ— Æ] Æ#n­éN–N˜ 0DšEÞ AŸàààààb‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡ 0ë Bzz 0¤— D3; D-n 0K›› ASæÆ9 0¤ÿ 0D£ A«ç˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular‹uV+s  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptj5+bk14b¢3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5«<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóX[Z‘ I&mage <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK þÝ ƒR'm$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåuò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôåuòòôåuÔ€It€is€interesting€to€note€that€Brian€Barrett,€who€entered€Ô_ÔMTSUÔ_Ô€in€the€fall€of€1993,€never€had€any€conversationsÐ ° Ðwith€his€grandfather€to€let€him€know€that€he€was€attending€college.€€However,€he€did€tell€Ms.€Richardson€about€his€plans,Ð tÄ Ðand€the€only€bequest€to€a€member€of€the€Barrett€family€found€in€the€will€of€January€11,€1994€was€the€one€to€Brian,€ð ðtoÐ 8ˆ Ðbe€used€exclusively€for€said€childððs€educational€expenses€through€his€collegiate€years.ððÔ#†ôåuòòôåu~#ÔÔ€ôåuòòôåuÔ- ù-(|G2'm$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A½»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôåuò»»Ô d(|3Ia$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A½»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Ia$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A½»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A½»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼A½»»»ÔÑ8€ ÙXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼A½»»¼A½Ôà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î5A½ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼A½»îî5+#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓSeptember€4,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X ÙX»¼A½ÔÌò òÔ#†¼A½»XX Ù#ÔIN€RE:€€ESTATE€OF€WILLIAM€D.€Ô_ÔNEELYÔ_ÔòòóóÔ‡X ÙX»¼A½Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Rutherford€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€36192€€€€€€Robert€E.€Ô_ÔCorlewÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„01144„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€October€22,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€trial€court€set€aside€a€will€that€was€executed€shortly€before€the€testatorððs€death,€on€findings€ofÐ xÈ  Ðconfidential€relationship,€suspicious€circumstances€and€undue€influence.€€We€affirm.Ô#†¼A½»XX Ù£#ÔÔ‡X ÙX»¼A½ÔÐ d´ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€CourtÐ <Œ ÐAffirmed€and€Remandedó óÐ (x ÐÓ>ÓÌòòÔ#†¼A½»àX Ù#ÔÔ‡X ÙX.¼A½ÔBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.óó€andÐ P ÐòòWilliam€B.€Cain,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ì< ÐÌJohn€T.€Blankenship€and€Patricia€A.€Blankenship,€Murfreesboro,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,Ð Ä ÐDorothy€Ann€Richardson,€Executrix.Ð ° ÐÌWilliam€P.€Nelms,€Murfreesboro,€Tennessee,€and€Susan€Melton,€Woodbury,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ ˆØ Ðappellees,€Billy€Barrett,€Jim€Barrett,€Mickey€Barrett,€Mark€Barrett,€Brian€Barrett€and€Timmy€Barrett.Ð tÄ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓOPINIONó óÔ#†¼A½»XX Ù#ÔÔ‡X ÙX»¼A½ÔÐ L œ ÐÓt ÓÌòòóóÔ#†¼A½»XX Ù­ #ÔÔ€X ÙX»¼A½ÔÓÓà@ccìàò òI.€òò€The€Making€of€a€Will€óóó óˆÐ $"t! ÐÓÓà  àThis€case€involves€a€challenge€to€a€will€executed€by€an€eighty„year„old€retired€farmer€onÐ ü#L# ÐJanuary€11,€1994,€just€twelve€days€before€his€death.€€The€terms€of€the€will€differed€greatly€fromÐ è$8 $ Ðearlier€dispositions€of€property€by€the€testator€and€his€late€wife€(who€predeceased€the€testator€by€fourÐ Ô%$!% Ðmonths).€€Since€the€question€of€the€validity€of€the€will€is€a€close€one,€we€must€discuss€theÐ À&"& Ðcircumstances€surrounding€its€procurement€and€execution€in€considerable€detail.Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÌà  àIn€September€of€1993,€Ô_ÔEulaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔMaiÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€the€wife€of€William€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€passed€away€after€a€longÐ „)Ô$) Ðillness.€€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€had€been€childhood€sweethearts,€and€were€married€to€each€other€forÐ p*À%* Ðalmost€sixty€years.€€His€wifeððs€death€was€a€devastating€blow€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô.€€He€cried€often€in€theÐ \+¬&+ Ðâ âfollowing€months,€and€spent€most€of€his€remaining€time€lying€in€bed€with€his€eyes€closed.€€Mr.Ð H,˜',ý ÐÔ_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€doctor€diagnosed€him€with€chronic€depression,€and€added€anti„depressants€to€the€grievingÐ ° Ðwidowerððs€extensive€drug€regimen.Ð œì Ðâ  €€€€Ð ˆØ Ðà  àThe€Ô_ÔNeelysÔ_Ôðð€marriage€had€produced€three€daughters,€only€two€of€whom€survived€intoÐ tÄ Ðadulthood.€€One€daughter,€Bobby€Jean€Barrett,€died€in€1983,€leaving€six€sons.€€The€other€daughter,Ð `° ÐDorothy€Ann€Richardson,€had€three€sons€and€a€daughter.€€All€the€grandchildren€worked€in€Mr.Ð L œ ÐÔ_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€numerous€farming€enterprises€when€they€were€young,€and€continued€to€help€to€a€lesserÐ 8 ˆ Ðextent€after€they€grew€up.€€In€August€or€September€of€1993,€Steven€Richardson,€who€wasÐ $ t Ðunemployed€at€the€time,€took€over€the€operation€of€the€farm.€€Ralph€Richardson,€who€had€a€job€asÐ  ` Ða€printer,€also€helped€out,€and€moved€into€a€tenant€house€on€the€property.€€€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àBoth€Ô_ÔNeelysÔ_Ô€had€been€suffering€from€serious€health€problems€prior€to€the€death€of€Ms.€Ô_ÔEulaÔ_ÔÐ Ô$  ÐÔ_ÔMaiÔ_Ô.€€Because€their€infirmities€made€it€difficult€or€impossible€for€them€to€handle€the€ordinaryÐ À  Ðdemands€of€daily€living,€Ms.€Richardson€took€over€their€financial€affairs,€and€oversaw€their€medicalÐ ¬ü  Ðneeds.€€In€1992,€her€name€was€placed€on€their€bank€accounts.€€She€paid€their€bills€and€madeÐ ˜è  Ðarrangements€for€the€in„home€health€care€they€both€needed.€€She€also€had€access€to€a€key€for€aÐ „Ô  Ðlockbox€containing€all€their€important€papers.€€Mr.€and€Ms.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€were€both€bedridden€by€1993,€andÐ pÀ Ðhospital€beds€were€set€up€for€them€in€the€living€room€of€their€house.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àAfter€the€death€of€his€wife,€Ms.€Richardson€and€her€sons€visited€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€on€a€daily€basis.Ð 4„ ÐHer€sons€testified€that€their€mother€never€placed€any€restrictions€or€limitations€on€the€time€they€couldÐ  p Ðspend€with€their€grandfather.€€The€Barrett€grandsons,€who€lived€further€away,€testified€that€they€alsoÐ  \ Ðtried€to€visit,€but€that€Ms.€Richardson€discouraged€them,€and€limited€the€duration€of€each€visit€to€fiveÐ øH Ðor€ten€minutes,€telling€them€that€their€grandfather€was€too€sick€for€longer€visits.€€Ms.€RichardsonÐ ä4 Ðadmitted€limiting€their€visits,€but€testified€that€she€did€so€to€protect€her€fatherððs€health.€€€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€some€point,€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€brother€and€former€business€partner€Ô_ÔArzelleÔ_Ô€visited.€€WilliamÐ ¨ø ÐÔ_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€told€his€brother€that€he€wanted€to€change€his€will.€€Attorney€Larry€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€had€previously€takenÐ ”ä Ðcare€of€some€legal€matters€for€Ô_ÔArzelleÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€so€Ô_ÔArzelleÔ_Ô€went€to€see€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô,€and€asked€him€toÐ €Ð Ðcontact€his€brother.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àWhen€Larry€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€arrived€at€the€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€home,€Dorothy€Richardson,€her€husband,€and€a€sitterÐ D!” Ðwere€there.€€After€exchanging€some€pleasantries€with€them,€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€asked€them€to€let€him€speakÐ 0"€  Ðprivately€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€and€they€left€the€room.€€During€his€one€hour€conversation€with€WilliamÐ #l! ÐÔ_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€was€able€to€satisfy€himself€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€was€oriented€as€to€time€and€place,€thatÐ $X" Ðhe€knew€the€various€assets€that€made€up€his€estate,€and€that€he€remembered€all€his€children€andÐ ô$D # Ðgrandchildren.€Though€it€was€obvious€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€that€he€was€extremely€ill,€the€attorneyÐ à%0!$ Ðconcluded€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€had€the€mental€capacity€to€make€a€will.€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àMr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€had€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€existing€will€in€his€possession€at€that€meeting€(although€it€isÐ ¤(ô#' Ðunclear€how€he€obtained€it).€€That€will€apparently€treated€his€surviving€daughter€equally€with€theÐ )à$( Ðheirs€of€his€deceased€daughter.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€read€the€will€line€by€line€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_ÔÐ |*Ì%) Ðin€turn€told€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€the€changes€he€wanted€to€make.€€Those€changes€virtually€disinherited€the€sixÐ h+¸&* ÐBarrett€grandchildren,€and€left€almost€the€entire€estate€to€Dorothy€Richardson.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€askedÐ ° ÐMr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€his€reasons€for€such€a€change,€and€according€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ôððs€testimony,€ð ðhe€indicated€thatÐ œì Ðhe€was€disappointed€with,€I€guess,€the€grandchildren€through€his€deceased€daughter,€that€he€didnððtÐ ˆØ Ðfeel€like€they€had€come€to€see€him,€cared€about€him,€behaved€in€a€manner€that€he€approved.ððÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àIn€a€week€or€less,€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€returned€with€a€draft€of€the€new€will.€€He€again€had€a€privateÐ L œ Ðconversation€with€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€and€read€the€will€to€him.€€Thirty€or€forty€minutes€later,€two€of€Mr.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÔ_ÔTolbertÔ_Ôððs€secretaries€arrived,€and€they€witnessed€the€signing€of€the€will€by€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô.€€The€willÐ $ t Ðnamed€Ms.€Richardson€as€executrix€of€the€estate.€€A€bequest€of€$18,000€was€made€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_ÔððsÐ  ` Ðgreat„grandchild,€Erin€Nicole€Richardson.€Another€bequest€of€$4,000€for€educational€purposes€wasÐ ü L  Ðmade€to€Bryan€Daniel€Barrett,€the€only€grandchild€to€ever€attend€college.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€residual€clause€gave€all€the€remainder€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€property€to€Dorothy€Richardson,Ð À  Ðwith€her€husband€and€children€as€contingent€beneficiaries.€€The€clause€concluded€ð ð[Ô_Ôi]nÔ_Ô€making€theÐ ¬ü  Ðforegoing€bequest,€I€am€not€unmindful€of€certain€other€grandchildren€by€my€beloved€and€deceasedÐ ˜è  Ðdaughter,€Ô_ÔBOBBYEÔ_Ô€JEAN€BARRETT,€but€choose€to€omit€said€children€from€any€share€of€myÐ „Ô  Ðestate.ððÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àOn€January€15,€1994,€just€four€days€after€the€execution€of€the€will,€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€was€admittedÐ H˜ Ðto€the€hospital.€€His€doctor€testified€that€he€was€suffering€from€chronic€depression,€as€well€asÐ 4„ Ðbedsores,€diabetes,€severe€peripheral€vascular€disease,€and€chronic€hepatic€insufficiency.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_ÔÐ  p Ðdied€on€January€23,€1994.€Ð  \ ÐÌà@kk!ìàò òII.€€òòA€Will€ContestóóˆÐ ä4 Ðó óÌà  àPursuant€to€the€petition€of€Dorothy€Ann€Richardson,€the€will€discussed€above€was€admittedÐ ¼  Ðto€probate€in€common€form€on€February€3,€1994,€and€the€Probate€Court€issued€Letters€TestamentaryÐ ¨ø Ðto€Ms.€Richardson€as€Executrix.€€On€February€8,€1996,€the€six€Barrett€grandchildren€filed€aÐ ”ä Ðcomplaint€to€contest€the€will.€€They€alleged€that€the€will€of€January€11,€1994€was€not€valid€becauseÐ €Ð ÐMr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€was€not€of€sound€mind€at€the€time€of€its€execution,€and€because€he€had€been€undulyÐ l¼ Ðinfluenced€by€Dorothy€Ann€Richardson.€€The€Probate€Court€certified€the€will€contest€for€trial€to€theÐ X ¨ ÐCircuit€Court.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àJudge€Taylor€of€the€Circuit€Court€conducted€a€hearing€of€the€matter€on€January€13€and€14,Ð #l! Ð1999.€After€hearing€the€testimony€of€Ms.€Richardson,€three€of€the€Barrett€brothers,€and€Ô_ÔArzelleÔ_ÔÐ $X" ÐÔ_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô,€the€judge€concluded€that€the€decedent€was€lucid€at€the€time€he€made€his€Last€Will€andÐ ô$D # ÐTestament.€€He€also€found€that€Ms.€Richardson€had€a€fiduciary€relationship€with€the€testator,€but€thatÐ à%0!$ Ðshe€did€not€exercise€dominion€and€control€over€him,€and€she€was€not€active€in€the€preparation€orÐ Ì&"% Ðexecution€of€his€will.€For€those€reasons,€he€determined€that€the€plaintiffs€had€failed€to€make€out€aÐ ¸'#& Ðprima€facie€case,€and€he€granted€the€defendantððs€Motion€for€a€Directed€Verdict.€€€€€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiffs€then€filed€a€Motion€for€New€Trial,€arguing€that€the€Courtððs€decision€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðcontrary€to€existing€case€law.€€They€contended€that€the€finding€of€a€fiduciary€relationship€created€aÐ h+¸&* Ðpresumption€of€undue€influence,€shifting€the€burden€of€proof€to€the€defendant€to€rebut€theÐ ° Ðpresumption,€and€that€Ms.€Richardson€had€not€met€that€burden.€€After€reviewing€the€case€of€òòMitchellÐ œì Ðv.€Smithóó,€779€S.W.2d€384€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989)€the€trial€court€granted€the€motion,€and€ordered€theÐ ˆØ Ðmatter€reset€for€trial€with€a€different€trier€of€fact.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àA€second€trial€was€conducted€on€March€14€and€16,€2000,€this€time€before€Judge€Ô_ÔCorlewÔ_Ô.€€TheÐ L œ Ðproof€showed€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€estate€was€quite€valuable.€Aside€from€financial€assets€of€overÐ 8 ˆ Ð$150,000,€it€included€two€farms€of€102€acres€and€124€acres€respectively.€€Both€farms€adjoin€theÐ $ t ÐMurfreesboro€City€Limits,€and€are€surrounded€by€subdivisions.€Ms.€Richardson€testified€that€sheÐ  ` Ðdidnððt€know€much€about€real€estate,€but€conceded€that€the€properties€were€worth€substantially€moreÐ ü L  Ðthan€the€$165,300€indicated€by€the€inheritance€tax€return€filed€under€her€signature.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àMs.€Richardson€admitted€under€cross„examination€that€the€thought€of€how€the€Barrett€boysÐ À  Ðmight€spend€the€money€that€her€father€and€mother€accumulated€by€their€hard€work€really€botheredÐ ¬ü  Ðher,€but€she€didnððt€state€the€reason€for€her€concern.€She€testified€that€her€sons€did€more€of€the€workÐ ˜è  Ðon€the€farm€than€her€sisterððs€sons,€but€when€asked€whether€she€ever€called€her€nephews€to€come€andÐ „Ô  Ðhelp€out,€she€stated€that€ð ðI€donððt€guess€I€did.€€Thereððs€a€reason€behind€that€also.ðð€She€never€explainedÐ pÀ Ðher€reason.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àAt€the€close€of€the€proof,€and€after€closing€arguments,€the€judge€took€the€case€underÐ 4„ Ðadvisement.€€€He€subsequently€issued€a€detailed€Letter€Memorandum€and€an€Order,€setting€aside€theÐ  p Ðwill.€€Judge€Ô_ÔCorlewÔ_Ô€found€a€confidential€relationship€between€the€testator€and€Ms.€Richardson,Ð  \ Ðwhich€together€with€several€suspicious€circumstances€created€a€presumption€of€undue€influence,€andÐ øH Ðshifted€the€burden€of€proof€to€the€proponent€of€the€will€to€prove€that€it€was€not€procured€by€undueÐ ä4 Ðinfluence.€The€court€found€that€the€willððs€proponent€did€not€present€sufficient€proof€to€dispel€theÐ Ð  Ðpresumption,€and€declared€the€will€to€be€void.€€This€appeal€followed.Ð ¼  Ѐ€Ð ¨ø Ðà@^^(ìàò òIII.ó óˆÐ ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€contends€that€contrary€to€the€finding€of€the€trial€court,€there€was€not€aÐ l¼ Ðconfidential€relationship€between€herself€and€the€testator.€€She€further€argues€that€even€if€we€agreeÐ X ¨ Ðwith€the€trial€court€that€such€a€relationship€did€exist,€it€should€not€raise€a€presumption€of€undueÐ D!” Ðinfluence,€because€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€received€independent€advice€from€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô.€We€will€examine€bothÐ 0"€  Ðof€these€arguments,€and€we€will€discuss€some€of€the€suspicious€circumstances€that€the€trial€courtÐ #l! Ðfound€were€sufficient€to€support€a€determination€that€the€will€wasòò€óóinvalidòò.€Ð $X" ÐÌà@llìàò òa.€€Confidentialóó€òòRelationshipóóˆÐ à%0!$ Ðó óÌà  àIn€òòÔ_ÔMatlockÔ_Ô€v.€Simpsonóó,€902€S.W.2d€384€(Tenn.€1995),€our€Supreme€Court€restated€the€long„Ð ¸'#& Ðestablished€rule€that€ð ðthe€existence€of€a€confidential€or€fiduciary€relationship,€together€with€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðtransaction€by€which€the€dominant€party€obtains€a€benefit€from€the€other€party,€gives€rise€to€aÐ )à$( Ðpresumption€of€undue€influence.ðð€€902€S.W.2d€at€385.€€Certain€relationships,€such€as€those€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðconservator€and€ward,€are€proof,€as€a€matter€of€law,€of€the€existence€of€a€confidential€relationship.Ð h+¸&* ÐòòÔ_ÔParhamÔ_Ô€v.€Walkeróó,€568€S.W.2d€622€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1978).€€€An€unrestricted€power€of€attorney,€inÐ ° Ðand€of€itself,€also€creates€a€confidential€relationship€between€the€parties.€€òòMitchell€v.€Smithóó,€779Ð œì ÐS.W.2d€384€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€appellant€notes€that€none€of€the€relationships€that€prove€the€existence€of€a€confidentialÐ `° Ðrelationship€as€a€matter€of€law€are€present€in€the€case€at€bar.€€While€her€name€was€on€her€fatherððsÐ L œ Ðbank€accounts,€and€she€took€care€of€all€his€financial€affairs,€he€did€not€execute€a€power€of€attorneyÐ 8 ˆ Ðin€her€favor.€€She€relies€upon€the€case€ofòò€Kelly€v.€Allenóó,€558€S.W.2d€845€(Tenn.€1977),€which€citedÐ $ t Ða€long€line€of€prior€cases€to€the€effect€that€ð ðthe€normal€relationship€between€a€mentally€competentÐ  ` Ðparent€and€an€adult€child€is€not€per€se€a€confidential€relationship€and€raises€no€presumption€of€theÐ ü L  Ðinvalidity€of€a€gift€from€one€to€the€other.ðð€€558€S.W.2d€at€848.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€òòAllenóó€Court€went€on€to€say,€however,€that€where€the€elements€of€dominion€and€controlÐ À  Ðby€the€stronger€over€the€weaker€are€present,€or€where€there€is€a€showing€of€senility€or€physical€andÐ ¬ü  Ðmental€deterioration€in€the€testator,€or€other€conditions€which€would€tend€to€establish€that€the€freeÐ ˜è  Ðagency€of€the€donor€was€destroyed,€then€the€presumption€against€the€will€is€applicable.€€òòSee€alsoÐ „Ô  ÐRichmond€v.€Christianóó,€555€S.W.2d€105€(Tenn.€1977).€Ð pÀ Ðà  àÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€was€completely€dependent€upon€his€daughter,€not€only€for€hisÐ H˜ Ðfinancial€needs,€but€for€all€of€his€physical€needs€as€well.€€The€proof€showed€that€he€was€taking€a€greatÐ 4„ Ðnumber€of€medications,€that€he€could€not€move€from€his€bed€to€a€reclining€chair€in€the€same€roomÐ  p Ðwithout€assistance,€that€he€was€incontinent€and€had€to€wear€a€diaper,€that€he€usually€lay€in€bed€allÐ  \ Ðday€with€his€eyes€closed,€and€that€he€had€to€have€a€sitter€or€someone€else€with€him€at€all€times.Ð øH ÐThough€Ms.€Richardson€did€not€reside€in€his€house,€she€was€the€one€who€hired€and€paid€the€sittersÐ ä4 Ðwho€stayed€with€him€when€she€could€not.€€He€was€clearly€under€her€dominion€and€control.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àWe€believe€that€a€will€executed€under€such€circumstances,€which€leaves€virtually€all€theÐ ¨ø Ðtestatorððs€property€to€the€person€exercising€dominion€and€control€over€him,€and€which€disinheritsÐ ”ä Ðothers€who€would€normally€be€considered€natural€recipients€of€his€bounty,€must€be€regarded€withÐ €Ð Ðthe€utmost€skepticism.€€Such€skepticism€is€consistent€with€the€rule€which€creates€a€presumption€thatÐ l¼ Ðthe€weaker€party€was€the€victim€of€undue€influence€on€the€part€of€the€dominant€party,€and€that€hisÐ X ¨ Ðwill€is€therefore€invalid.Ð D!” ÐÌà@f f ìàò òòòb.€€The€Rule€of€Independent€Adviceóóó ó€ˆÐ #l! ÐÌà  àThe€presumption€of€undue€influence€arising€from€the€dominion€and€control€of€one€party€byÐ ø$H # Ðanother€is€not€a€conclusive€presumption.€€It€can€be€rebutted,€but€only€by€clear€and€convincingÐ ä%4!$ Ðevidence€of€the€fairness€of€the€transaction.€òò€Ô_ÔMatlockÔ_Ô€v.€Simpsonóó,€902€S.W.2d€384,€386€(Tenn.€1995).Ð Ð& "% ÐProof€that€the€testator€received€independent€advice€concerning€the€disposition€of€his€property€is€oneÐ ¼' #& Ðway€to€establish€fairness.€€òòBills€v.€Lindsayóó,€909€S.W.2d€434€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòRichmond€v.Ð ¨(ø#' ÐChristianóó,€555€S.W.2d€105€(Tenn.€1977).€€€Ð ”)ä$( Ðâ âÐ €*Ð%) Ðà  àThe€appellant€contends€that€she€was€not€involved€in€any€way€with€the€advice€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_ÔÐ ° Ðâ âreceived€from€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€at€the€time€of€the€willððs€execution.€€She€notes€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€did€not€askÐ œì Ðher€to€find€a€lawyer€so€he€could€change€his€will,€but€asked€his€brother€instead;€that€she€herself€hadÐ ˆØ Ðnever€been€a€client€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ôððs;€and€that€she€was€not€in€the€room€during€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€twoÐ tÄ Ðconversations€with€the€lawyer.€€She€also€testified€that€she€never€spoke€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€or€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_ÔÐ `° Ðabout€the€estate€or€about€the€will,€and€other€witnesses€testified€that€they€never€observed€her€tryingÐ L œ Ðto€influence€her€father€in€regard€to€the€disposition€of€his€property.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€stated€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔTolbertÔ_Ô€had€acted€in€a€responsible€manner,€and€found€that€heÐ  ` Ðhad€counseled€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€without€the€direct€involvement€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ôððs€daughter.€€However,€Ms.Ð ü L  ÐRichardsonððs€hands„off€attitude€in€regard€to€the€execution€of€the€will€does€not€fully€dispel€theÐ è 8  Ðpresumption€of€undue€influence,€because€it€does€not€eliminate€the€questions€raised€by€her€conductÐ Ô$  Ðwhen€she€acted,€in€effect,€as€the€gatekeeper€for€her€father.Ð À  ÐÌà@ccìàò òIV.€€òòSuspicious€Circumstancesóóó óˆÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  àIn€òòMitchell€v.€Smithóó,€779€S.W.2d€384€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989),€this€court€noted€that€whileÐ pÀ Ðundue€influence€can€be€proven€by€either€direct€or€circumstantial€evidence,€direct€evidence€is€rarelyÐ \¬ Ðavailable,€and€in€most€cases,€it€is€established€by€proving€the€existence€of€suspicious€circumstancesÐ H˜ Ðwarranting€the€conclusion€that€the€will€was€not€the€testator's€free€and€independent€act.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAmong€the€suspicious€circumstances€listed€in€òòMitchell€v.€Smith,óó€supra,€are€the€existence€ofÐ  \ Ða€confidential€relationship€between€the€testator€and€the€beneficiary,€physical€or€mental€deteriorationÐ øH Ðof€the€testator,€the€testator's€advanced€age,€secrecy€concerning€the€will's€existence,€the€unjust€orÐ ä4 Ðunnatural€nature€of€the€will's€terms,€and€the€testator€being€in€an€emotionally€distraught€state.€€779Ð Ð  ÐS.W.2d€at€388.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€found€most€of€the€circumstances€listed€above€to€be€presentÐ ”ä Ðto€a€greater€or€lesser€degree.€€For€example,€the€court€found€that€the€testator€had€suffered€both€physicalÐ €Ð Ðand€mental€deterioration,€but€acknowledged€that€the€extent€of€his€mental€deterioration€was€disputed.Ð l¼ ÐThe€court€also€found€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€was€emotionally€distraught€at€least€some€of€the€time.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€also€found€the€limitations€on€visitation€by€the€Barrett€grandchildren€to€be€aÐ 0"€  Ðfactor€warranting€suspicion.€€The€proof€showed€that€Ms.€Richardsonððs€children€had€unlimited€accessÐ #l! Ðto€their€grandfather,€but€that€she€placed€stringent€limitations€upon€visits€by€the€children€of€herÐ $X" Ðdeceased€sister.€€Ms.€Richardson€testified€that€these€limitations€were€in€place€for€the€sake€of€herÐ ô$D # Ðfatherððs€health,€but€she€never€explained€why€visits€by€the€Barrett€grandchildren€would€be€detrimentalÐ à%0!$ Ðto€his€health,€while€visits€by€the€Richardson€grandchildren€would€not€be.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  à€We€can€infer€from€her€testimony€that€she€did€not€approve€of€something€in€the€behavior€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðher€nephews,€but€since€she€failed€to€enlighten€the€court€on€what€she€objected€to,€we€cannot€evaluateÐ )à$( Ðâ âthe€validity€of€her€reasons€for€excluding€them€from€the€company€of€their€grandfather.€€We€can€onlyÐ |*Ì%) Ðobserve€that€she€was€in€a€position€to€control€the€information€he€received€about€them,€and€that€he€wasÐ ° Ðdependent€upon€her€for€an€understanding€as€to€their€conduct€and€their€attitude€towards€him.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àAppellant€disputes€the€trial€courtððs€findings€as€to€the€suspicious€circumstances€enumeratedÐ tÄ Ðin€òòMitchell€v.€Smithóó,€supra.€€She€also€claims€that€the€restrictions€imposed€upon€the€Barrett€grandsonsÐ `° Ðwere€not€quite€as€stringent€as€they€testified€to,€and€that€she€didnððt€have€complete€control€overÐ L œ Ðvisitation,€because€Ô_ÔArzelleÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔNeelyÔ_Ô€could€visit€his€brother€any€time€he€wanted€to.€€We€are€compelledÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€presume,€however,€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€are€correct,€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÐ $ t Ðotherwise.€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€13(d).€€After€a€careful€and€thorough€reading€of€the€record,€we€do€notÐ  ` Ðbelieve€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings€that€there€are€a€number€ofÐ ü L  Ðsuspicious€circumstances€with€regard€to€the€will,€and€that€insufficient€evidence€was€presented€by€theÐ è 8  Ðbeneficiary€to€rebut€the€presumption€of€invalidity€arising€from€those€circumstances.€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàò òV.ó óˆÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€order€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Remand€this€cause€to€the€Circuit€Court€of€RutherfordÐ „Ô  ÐCounty€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€Tax€the€costs€on€appeal€to€the€appellant,Ð pÀ ÐDorothy€Ann€Richardson.Ð \¬ Ðà  àÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________________€Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.