ÿWPCm ¢ƒ/ ¨â÷f3&Æ$Æe Ë’@ ¨%$€_ ¯¯@1¾‹ì’‰½¿ãö´6„xŠà¹Ÿ-Ân?ÖI0™Æ—©µ©¤bÑ®3Ž úÐ 'Î5;•UbJ⇒GÒÏÈ'ë~¯0ù=ŒÃëK{0õ3¢1Ž=Às,d€AdûH—˜_ª?ýJà¤Åìµ]†Þ©¯Â¨©‡çŽöX"{¬òàY®†'4¢œyq”Ðúû‡Ê~CÙÒœÞè5âB;hèZ—r“u–"Ü`ºüŽBV5¨ÝË––/†Yr¤“J œ ØáÁ*>âˆ@tÒ@c{’ÓX:5Í[Œÿä€4†Ö;ä™Äª˜YX\á(kEý _ˆ¨ôSi6‰xHÓ?º8ºy5;Ñ‚ë ñÛÿW› ¶ôïÞïÂÈÝÒòNx=?ôÓÅw‰ä¥ U±­‡ùàäCJ¥]k畆*u‰„GWÇ?K>qÄJà¶b” ¤ÜÆ&V{c¥G–hP&vdVÉ¥`åq.üôAµ½U@>ß8æ8¼Ú3xŠúú._:hç„~už§c8ÝÒ!Õgàâz¶?Wõ¬'åKfÚßu&Iùhbqsg ¼fó]Q¿ïF‡KöÂ,ìvHO’*# LU:W %‘ 0(—b ¿w@Ë4 n­.ÛãU:è 0l" 0DŽUFÒc €{ U:û U@5U:u¯U:´´´´´´´´´ Bî AQ Æ\ 0D" 0Df 0Dªª D/îî B D3:˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡- ù - MUN™ODP™QDRDSDTUÓ€_Ö…#%3|xa«<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@ ûÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ XÕXXXÔÔ€ 4XX XÕÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XÕX 4XÔÐ  ÐÌSeptember€24,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó<4šÛ 9Z ‹.Courier New Regular YÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà Ø àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€X©DXXXÔÔ€ô‡ôXX©DÔThe€action€was€brought€in€Warren€County€because€Mr.€Thompson€had€a€McMinnville›Ð  Ðaddress,€and€Mr.€Rubleyððs€attorney€assumed€this€meant€he€was€a€resident€of€Warren€County.€œ€While›Ïwe€are€not€certain€that€the€trial€court€acted€properly€in€waiving€any€questions€of€jurisdiction€andÏvenue€in€order€to€proceed,€we€have€not€been€called€upon€to€rule€on€the€propriety€of€a€proceedingÏwhich€is€at€most€€collateral€to€this€appeal.€ vÝ ƒ ä$ÝÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€X)UXXXÔÔ€X‚¨XXX)UÔà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓÓà0 ` àThe€action€was€brought€in€Warren€County€because€Mr.€Thompson€had€aÐ  ÐMcMinnville›€address,€and€Mr.€Rubleyððs€attorney€assumed€this€meant€he€was€aÏresident€of€Warren€County.€While€we€are€not€certain€that€the€trial€court€actedÏproperly€in€waiving€any€questions€of€jurisdiction€and€venue€in€order€to€proceed,€weÏhave€not€been€called€upon€to€rule€on€the€propriety€of€a€proceeding€which€is€at€most€Ïcollateral€to€this€appeal.€, øð AZ‹"Arial Regularô\  `(Times NewRomanTT, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular ûÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XÕXXXÔÔ€4XXXÕÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XÕX4XÔÐ  ÐÌSeptember€23,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñUñ›ñUñѰÑÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€ÕXXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñò òÔ€¼¦@¼XXÔÓ  Óñ_ññUñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eô ` 8ttxP,ð  rßñUññ_ññ_ñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eô ` 8ttxP,ð  rßñ_ññUñ›ñUñà@  êàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@¦¦(êàAT€NASHVILLEó óÔ€XÕX¼¼¦@ԈР ÐÌÌÌÌIN€RE:€BANKS€DEWEY€THOMPSONà  à)Ð È À Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)ÌCHRISTINE€PERRY,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ”Œ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAppeal€No.Ð zr  Ðà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellant,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è à01„A„01„9801„CH„00044Ð `X  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ F>  МVS›.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àœGrundy›€ChanceryÐ ,$  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€94„612Ð   ÐJAMES€EARL€œRUBLEY›,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ øð  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ ÞÖ  Ðà Ø àDefendant/Appellee.à 8 àà  à)à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # àРļ ÐÌÌà@° ° êàAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€œGRUNDY›€COUNTYˆÌà@**)êàAT€œALTAMONT›ˆÌÌà@S S êàTHE€HONORABLE€JEFFREY€F.€STEWART,€CHANCELLORˆÌÌÌÌPAUL€D.€CROSSÌ100€Highway€64€WestÌP.€O.€Box€99ÌœMonteagle›,€Tennessee€37356Ìà Ø àAttorney€for€Plaintiff/AppellantÌÌAUBREY€L.€HARPERÌ114€North€College€StreetÌP.€O.€Box€588ÌœMcMinnville›,€Tennessee€37111„0588Ìà Ø àAttorney€for€Defendant/AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌÌà@||$êàREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDˆÌÌÌÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌTODD,€P.J.,€M.S.ÌKOCH,€J.ÌÐ  è7à06/ ÐÓÓò òÔ€„_„XXÕÔòòà@tt(êàO€P€I€N€I€O€œNóóó óÔ€XÕX„„_ԈР ÐÌ›à ( àà € àà Ø àà 0 àThe€trial€court€set€aside€the€testatorððs€1992€will€on€the€ground€that€theÏsole€beneficiary€under€that€will€had€exerted€undue€influence€upon€the€testator.€€WeÏreverse,€because€we€find€that€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€against€theÏtrial€courtððs€finding€of€undue€influence.ÌÌà@ÐÐ êàò òI.€€€The€Making€of€Two€Willsó óˆÐ ˜  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àThis€case€involves€two€wills€executed€by€Banks€Dewey€Thompson,€aÏresident€of€œGrundy›€County€who€was€born€in€1903.€€After€the€death€of€his€wife,€Mr.ÏThompson€executed€a€will€which€named€the€appellee,€his€nephew€James€Earl€œRubley›,Ïas€his€executor€and€chief€beneficiary.€€The€will€was€dated€August€8,€1984.€€Mr.ÏThompson€executed€a€second€will€on€May€8,€1992,€which€explicitly€revoked€all€priorÏwills,€and€which€named€the€appellant,€Mrs.€Christine€Perry,€as€his€executrix€and€soleÏbeneficiary.€€The€parties€have€stipulated€that€both€wills€were€executed€in€accordanceÏwith€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€law.€€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àBoth€wills€recited€that€Banks€Thompson€had€no€children€surviving€him.ÏThe€proof€showed€that€James€Rubley€and€other€family€members€had€assisted€Mr.ÏThompson€in€numerous€ways€for€over€20€years,€and€that€they€continued€to€assist€himÏas€he€aged,€and€as€his€physical€condition€declined.€€Mr.€Rubley€and€his€family€livedÏin€Warren€County,€about€seven€miles€away€from€Mr.€Thompson.€€After€his€wife€died,ÏMr.€Thompson€signed€over€his€life€savings€of€about€$19,000€to€Mr.€Rubley,€in€orderÏto€qualify€for€SSI€and€Medicaid€benefits.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€December€of€1991,€Mr.€Thompson€was€admitted€to€the€hospital€withÏa€flu„like€illness.€€The€admitting€doctor,€Jim€Jenkins€diagnosed€the€illness€asÐ ”8Œ16 Ðsepticemia,€and€also€noted€several€other€conditions€in€the€elderly€gentleman,€includingÏmild€dementia.€€After€a€follow„up€visit,€Dr.€Jenkins€recommended€that€Mr.€ThompsonÏno€longer€drive,€and€that€he€should€not€be€left€alone.€€Mr.€Rubley€accordingly€askedÏChristine€Perry€if€she€could€provide€his€uncle€with€household€help.€€Mrs.€Perry€livedÏjust€a€few€houses€away€from€Mr.€Thompson,€and€had€known€him€and€his€late€wife€forÏabout€twenty„five€years.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àMrs.€Perry€agreed€to€help€Mr.€Thompson.€€At€first€she€declined€Mr.ÏRubleyððs€offer€to€pay€for€her€services,€but€she€finally€agreed€that€Mr.€Rubley€couldÏmake€payments€to€her€teenage€son€for€his€school€expenses.€€The€payments,€whichÏultimately€œtotalled›€$325,€were€taken€from€the€money€that€Mr.€Thompson€had€turnedÏover€to€his€nephew.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àMrs.€Perry€visited€Mr.€Thompson€twice€a€day,€cooked€and€cleaned€forÏhim,€kept€him€company,€and€did€much€to€make€him€comfortable.€€Mr.€Rubley€and€hisÏfamily€continued€to€buy€€groceries€for€the€elderly€widower€and€to€deliver€them€to€hisÏhome.€€They€did€not€tell€Mr.€Thompson€that€Mrs.€Perry€was€being€paid,€because€theyÏfeared€that€he€would€refuse€her€services€if€he€knew€that€any€money€was€involved.€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThere€was€a€considerable€amount€of€testimony€in€the€record€as€to€aÏdecline€in€Mr.€Thompsonððs€faculties€after€1990,€including€problems€with€memory,Ïvision€and€hearing.€€However€his€lifelong€friend,€Earl€Creighton,€testified€that€evenÏafter€Mrs.€Perry€began€helping€him,€Mr.€Thompson€remained€active,€that€he€continuedÏto€take€care€of€his€garden,€that€he€built€a€closet€in€his€bedroom€from€lumber€that€Mr.ÏCreighton€brought€him,€and€that€the€two€friends€could€enjoy€an€intelligent€conversationÏthat€lasted€over€two€hours.Ð ¨9 26 Їà Ø àà 0 àAt€one€point,€Mrs.€Perry€drove€Mr.€Thompson€into€town€so€he€could€seeÏhis€lawyer,€William€Davis.€€According€to€Mr.€Davisðð€deposition€testimony,€he€and€Mr.ÏThompson€went€to€the€bank€to€check€on€his€account.€€Mr.€Thompson€expected€thereÏto€be€$19,000€in€his€account,€and€according€to€Mr.€Davis,€he€was€disappointed€whenÏhe€learned€that€there€was€no€significant€balance.€€The€appellee€suggests€that€Mr.ÏThompson€did€not€remember€the€circumstances€under€which€he€transferred€theÏmoney€to€his€nephew,€due€to€a€faulty€memory.€€The€appellant€claims€that€Mr.€RubleyÏnever€properly€accounted€to€Mr.€Thompson€for€the€use€of€his€money.€€In€any€case,€Mr.ÏThompson€subsequently€decided€to€change€his€will.€€At€trial,€Mrs.€Perry€described€theÏcircumstances€under€which€she€learned€of€his€plans:€ÌÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓQ.à ˆ àWhose€idea€was€it€that€Mr.€Thompson€made€a€willÐ ÈÀ Ðleaving€you€his€place?ÌÌA.à ˆ àMr.€Thompsonððs€idea.Ð ˜ ÐÌQ.à ˆ àTell€his€Honor€what€the€first€you€heard€about€that€was.€Ð xp ÐWhat€was€the€first€you€knew€about€œthat?ñLñÌñLñ›Ì.€.€œ.ñMñÌñMñ›ÌA.à ˆ àWhen€I€was€up€there€at€his€house,€and€I€was€in€theÐ (#  Ðkitchen€and€I€was€washing€everything€off€in€the€kitchen€andÏstraightening€up,€he€was€on€the€porch€and€he€came€in€thereÏand€told€me€he€needed€to€talk€to€me.€€So€I€just€laid€myÏdishrag€down€and€I€dried€my€hands€and€said€okay.€€And€heÏsaid€I€am€going€to€fix€up€a€paper€so€you€can€have€my€place.ÏAnd€I€told€him,€I€said,€you€donððt€have€to€do€that€Banks.€€AndÏhe€said€hush,€and€went€on€out.ÌÌÒ€0 ÒÒ„ÒÓÓÌà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Thompson€subsequently€asked€Mrs.€Perry€to€drive€him€to€town€soÏhe€could€see€Mr.€Davis€again.€€Mrs.€Perry€and€her€husband€accompanied€Mr.ÏThompson€to€town,€but€Mr.€Thompson€conferred€alone€with€Mr.€Davis€when€the€willÏin€dispute€was€drafted.€€The€following€month,€Mr.€Davis€drafted€an€instrument€whichÏgave€Mrs.€Perry€a€Durable€Power€of€Attorney€over€Mr.€Thompsonððs€financial€affairs.ÏIt€is€undisputed€that€Mrs.€Perry€never€made€use€of€this€Power€of€Attorney.€ÌÐ ¸8°15 Їà@m m êàò òII.€€Conservatorship€and€Probate€Proceedingsó óˆÐ  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àShortly€after€the€1992€will€was€drafted,€Mr.€Rubley€and€his€four€brothersÏfiled€a€petition€in€the€Warren€County€Courtœñ>ñ׃×ñ>ññ>ñ׃×ñ>ñÝ ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›,€asking€for€the€appointment€of€a€guardianÐ ¨   Ðad€litem€for€Mr.€Thompson,€and€the€appointment€of€Mr.€Rubley€as€conservator.€€TheÏcase€was€heard€by€the€Chancery€Courtððs€Clerk€and€Master.€€On€June€9,€1992€theÏcourt€found€that€Mr.€Thompson€was€incapable€of€managing€his€own€affairs,€andÏappointed€James€Rubley€as€his€conservator€and€attorney€Scott€œHorton›€as€guardianÏad€litem.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€a€subsequent€proceeding,€Mr.€Thompson€asked€that€Mr.€Rubley€beÏremoved€as€conservator,€and€filed€a€counterclaim€for€the€return€of€his€$19,000.€€TheÏcourt€replaced€Mr.€Rubley€as€conservator€with€Mr.€œHorton›.€€Because€the€court€wasÏconcerned€that€Mr.€Thompson€may€have€exposed€himself€to€liability€by€making€aÏfraudulent€transfer€to€his€nephew,€it€declared€the€$19,000€to€have€been€a€gift,€with€aÏresulting€trust€impressed€upon€a€portion€of€it€for€Mr.€Thompsonððs€funeral€expenses.Ô‡XìÎXXX©DÔÐ (#  ÐÌÔ#†X©DXXXìÎ,&#Ôà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Thompsonððs€physical€and€mental€condition€declined,€and€sometimeÐ è&à" Ðin€1994€he€entered€a€nursing€home.€€He€died€on€September€7,€1994.€€ShortlyÏthereafter,€Mr.€Rubley€filed€a€petition€for€probate€of€Mr.€Thompsonððs€1984€will.€€TheÏpetition€stated€that€the€decedent€left€no€personal€property,€and€indicated€that€the€soleÏassets€of€the€estate€were€Mr.€Thompsonððs€house,€and€the€lot€it€stood€upon,€which€theÏPetitioner€estimated€to€be€worth€about€$12,000.€€Mr.€Rubley€also€stated€that€he€hadÏâ âð ðmade€a€thorough€search€for€Wills€signed€by€the€Decedent€other€and€later€than€theÐ (2 +. ÐWill€presented€but€has€found€no€such€Wills.ðð€€On€September€30,€1994,€Mrs.€Perry€filedÏa€petition€for€probate€of€the€1992€will.Ìâ âÌà Ø àà 0 à€During€a€two„part€hearing,€the€appellee€argued€that€the€later€will€wasÏinvalid,€because€Mr.€Thompson€lacked€testamentary€capacity€at€the€time€it€wasÏdrafted,€and€because€it€was€the€product€of€undue€influence€on€the€part€of€Mrs.€Perry.ÏThe€trial€court€found€that€the€appellee€failed€to€prove€that€Mr.€Thompson€lackedÏtestamentary€capacity,€but€that€he€succeeded€in€proving€undue€influence,€therebyÏinvalidating€the€1992€will.€€This€appeal€followed.€€€ÌÌà@!êàò òIII.€€Evidentiary€Questionsó óˆÐ ÈÀ ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àDuring€the€trial€of€this€case,€Mr.€Rubley€offered€documentation€from€theÏWarren€County€conservatorship€proceedings€to€prove€that€Mr.€Thompson€lackedÏtestamentary€capacity.€€These€documents€included€the€orders€of€the€court,€the€reportÏof€guardian€ad€litem€Scott€œHorton›,€and€the€transcript€of€the€proceedings.€€The€œGrundy›ÏCounty€Court€admitted€these€documents€over€the€objections€of€Mrs.€Perryððs€attorney,Ïwho€argued€that€they€constituted€inadmissable€hearsay.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€believe€that€under€Rule€804(b)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence,Ïit€was€error€to€admit€the€transcript€of€the€Warren€County€proceedings€into€evidence.ÏThe€relevant€portion€of€Rule€804(b)€reads:ÌÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà ˆ àHearsay€Exceptions.„„€The€following€are€not€excludedÏby€the€hearsay€rule€if€the€declarant€is€unavailable€as€aÏwitness:Ìà ˆ à(1)€Former€Testimony.„„€Testimony€given€as€a€witnessÏat€another€hearing€of€the€same€or€a€different€proceeding€or€inÏa€deposition€taken€in€compliance€with€law€in€the€course€of€theÏsame€or€another€proceeding,€if€the€party€against€whom€theÏtestimony€is€now€offered€had€both€an€opportunity€and€aÏsimilar€motive€to€develop€the€testimony€by€direct,€cross,€orÏredirect€examination.€ÌÒ€0 ÒÒ„ÒÐ ¨9 26 ÐÓÓà Ø àà 0 àSince€none€of€the€witnesses€at€the€conservatorship€€proceeding,€exceptÏfor€Mr.€Thompson,€were€later€unavailable,€as€that€term€is€defined€in€Rule€804(a),€itÏfollows€that€it€was€error€to€admit€the€prior€testimony€of€any€of€those€witnesses€(exceptÏpossibly€for€Mr.€Thompsonððs)€at€the€later€proceeding.€€However€after€reading€theÏtranscript€at€issue,€we€find€the€error€to€be€harmless,€because€the€testimony€elicited€atÏthe€conservatorship€proceeding€did€not€go€to€the€question€of€Mrs.€Perryððs€influenceÏover€Mr.€Thompson,€but€only€to€his€capacity€to€handle€his€own€affairs.€€€€€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€further€note€that€Scott€œHorton›€testified€at€the€trial€of€this€case,€andÏused€his€own€report€to€refresh€his€memory.€€There€was€thus€a€possible€basis€forÏadmitting€the€report,€but€again,€even€if€it€was€error€to€admit€it,€it€has€to€be€consideredÏharmless,€because€the€report€was€just€œduplicative›€to€Mr.€œHorton›ððs€testimony.€€For€theÏsake€of€convenience,€we€summarize€that€testimony€directly€below.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àMr.€œHorton›€interviewed€Mr.€Thompson€in€the€presence€of€Mrs.€Perry.€€HeÏfound€Mr.€Thompson€to€be€ð ðhealthy€and€in€good€spirits,€hard€of€hearing€and€a€likeableÏperson.ðð€€Mr.€Thompson€told€Mr.€œHorton›€that€James€and€Betty€Rubley€had€gotten€hisÏsavings€account,€and€that€he€wanted€to€get€it€back.€€He€also€said€that€he€did€not€needÏa€conservator,€but€that€if€he€did€have€someone€handling€his€money,€it€should€beÏChristine€Perry.€€€Mrs.€Perry€was€asked€if€she€wanted€to€do€this,€and€she€answered,Ïð ðwhatever€he€wants.ðð€€Because€of€Mr.€Thompsonððs€hearing€problem,€he€relied€uponÏMrs.€Perry€to€tell€Mr.€œHorton›€to€speak€louder,€or€to€repeat€what€Mr.€œHorton›€was€saying.€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€final€evidentiary€issue€involves€the€orders€of€the€Warren€CountyÏCourt.€€Since€those€are€public€records,€they€are€admissible€under€Rule€1005€of€theÏRules€of€Evidence,€but€only€to€the€extent€that€they€meet€the€requirement€of€relevance.ÏWe€note€that€the€œGrundy›€County€Court€stated€that€it€only€admitted€the€orders€and€theÏtranscript€ð ðbecause€they€may€have€some€bearing€on€the€issue€of€Mr.€ThompsonððsÐ ¨9 26 Ðmental€capacity.ðð€€They€were€thus€admitted€only€for€a€limited€purpose.€€The€courtÏcorrectly€found€the€orders€not€to€be€res€judicata€for€the€purpose€of€establishing€theÏexistence€of€undue€influence.€€€€€€€€€à  àÐ È À ÐÌà Ø àà@,,$êàò òIV.€€Undue€Influenceó óˆÐ ˆ€ ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àAs€we€stated€above,€the€trial€court€found€that€Mr.€Thompson€possessedÏtestamentary€capacity€at€the€time€he€executed€the€1992€will,€but€that€he€was€undulyÏinfluenced€by€Mrs.€Perry,€thus€rendering€the€will€invalid.Ì€€€Ìà Ø àà 0 àUndue€influence€exists€where€the€free€agency€of€a€testator€is€destroyedÏto€the€extent€that€the€will,€though€nominally€the€testatorððs€own,€is€in€reality€that€ofÏanother.€òò€œTaliaferro›€v.€Greenóó,€622€S.W.2d€829€(Tenn.€App.€1981).€€As€a€general€rule,Ð ˆ€ Ðit€is€presumed€that€undue€influence€does€not€enter€into€the€making€of€a€will,€and€theÏburden€of€proving€undue€influence€falls€upon€the€person€contesting€the€will.€òòÐ H!@ ÐHammond€v.€Union€Planters€National€Bankóó,€189€Tenn.€93,€222€S.W.2d€377€(1949).Ð (#  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àIt€is€not€unusual€for€a€testator€to€change€his€will€to€benefit€an€individualÏwho€has€helped€him€during€his€declining€€years.€€But€as€this€court€said€in€òòMatter€ofÐ È(À!$ ÐEstate€of€œDePriest›,óó€733€S.W.2d€œ74ñRñ,›€78ñRñ›€(Tenn.€App.€1986):Ð ¨* #& ÐÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà ˆ àð ðInfluence€arising€from€mere€acts€of€kindness,Ïattention,€and€congenial€intercourse€which€operate€to€secureÏor€retain€the€affection,€esteem,€or€good€will€of€the€testator,Ïand€induce€him€to€make€the€persons€performing€such€kindlyÏoffices€beneficiaries€in€his€will,€do€not€constitute€undueÏinfluence,€unless€such€acts€are€carried€out€with€the€purposeÏand€design€of€subjecting€the€mind€of€the€testator€to€theÏinfluence€and€the€direction€of€the€person€exercising€theÏinfluence,€and€thus€deprive€the€testator€of€his€free€will,€freeÏact,€and€free€agency."ÌÌñNñÒ€0 ÒñNñ733€S.W.2d€at€œ78ñSñ€(1986)ñSñ.›Ìâ âà Ø à€Ð È7À04 МñNñÒ€0 ÒñNñ›Ò„ÒÓÓà Ø àà 0 àThere€is€no€testimony€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€Mrs.€Perry€acted€withÏâ âthe€design€of€substituting€her€will€for€that€of€Mr.€Thompson,€or€that€she€encouragedÏhim€in€any€way€to€name€her€as€his€beneficiary.€€It€seems€clear€that€Mr.€ThompsonððsÏdecision€was€induced€in€part€by€his€resentment€over€Mr.€Rubleyððs€handling€of€his€bankÏaccount,€and€in€part€by€a€belief€that€Mrs.€Perry€was€acting€purely€as€a€goodÏSamaritan.€€However€there€is€no€proof€that€Mrs.€Perry€ever€criticized€Mr.€Rubley,€orÏthat€she€did€anything€to€fuel€Mr.€Thompsonððs€resentment€of€his€nephew.€€Further,€Mrs.ÏPerry€was€only€following€Mr.€Rubleyððs€instructions€by€not€disclosing€her€financialÏarrangements€with€him€to€Mr.€Thompson.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àBecause€of€the€complete€lack€of€evidence€of€undue€influence€in€theÏrecord,€we€must€conclude€that€the€trial€court€relied€upon€the€court€orders€from€WarrenÏCounty€to€reach€its€conclusion,€despite€its€statement€that€those€orders€were€beingÏadmitted€solely€for€the€purpose€of€shedding€light€on€Mr.€€Thompsonððs€€mental€capacity.ÏThe€Warren€County€Courtððs€order€of€June€9,€1992€reads€in€part:ÌÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà ˆ àIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED€that€the€Court€finds€thatÏat€the€present€time€Christine€Perry€is€being€paid€by€theÏmembers€of€Banks€Thompsonððs€family€to€look€after€and€careÏfor€him,€to€cook€meals€for€him,€and€check€on€him€as€to€hisÏwelfare€and€safety,€and€the€Court€finds€that€upon€the€reportÏof€the€Guardian€Ad€Litem,€that€Banks€Thompson€thinks€thatÏsaid€lady,€Christine€Perry,€is,€in€fact,€acting€out€of€theÏgoodness€of€her€heart€as€a€neighbor,€not€realizing€that€she€isÏa€paid€employee,€and€the€Court€therefore€finds€that€ChristineÏPerry€is€in€a€fiduciary€relationship€with€Banks€Thompson,€andÏthat€she€is€abusing€her€fiduciary€relationship€by€influencingÏBanks€Thompson€in€the€possibility€that€he€may€haveÏapproximately€six€months€ago,€according€to€the€finding€of€theÏGuardian€Ad€Litem,€executed€a€Will€which€may,€in€fact,€not€beÏa€valid€Will€due€to€the€findings€of€this€Court€that,€at€that€time,ÏBanks€Thompson€was€not€well.€€€€ÌÌÌÌÒ€0 ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà Ø àà 0 àPutting€aside€the€obvious€question€of€why€the€Clerk€and€Master€choseÏto€render€an€advisory€opinion€on€a€matter€beyond€its€subject€matter€jurisdiction,€weÏmust€state€that€the€above„quoted€language€was€entitled€to€little€or€no€weight€at€trial,Ð ¸8°15 Ðbecause€it€is€at€best€unsolicited€opinion€evidence€and€at€worst€inadmissable€hearsay.ÏWe€conclude€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court.ÏSee€Rule€13(d)€Tenn.€R.€App.€Proc.Ì€€€Ìà Ø àà 0 àThe€appellee€claims,€however,€that€the€reasoning€of€the€trial€court€isÏsound,€and€that€Mrs.€Perry€should€be€considered€to€have€been€in€a€confidentialÏrelationship€with€the€testator.€€Such€a€relationship€can€create€a€presumption€of€undueÏinfluence,€where€a€party€to€that€relationship€is€named€as€the€sole€beneficiary€of€theÏother€partyððs€will.€òò€Richmond€v.€Christianóó,€555€S.W.2d€105€(Tenn.€1977).€€When€aÐ  Ðconfidential€relationship€is€proven€to€exist,€the€burden€of€proof€is€said€to€shift€to€theÏbeneficiary€to€rebut€the€presumption.€òò€œParham›€v.€Walkeróó,€568€S.W.2d€622€(Tenn.€App.Ð ÈÀ Ð1978).Ì€€€€€Ìà Ø àœñOñ`ñOñ›à 0 àWhile€confidential€relationships€include€certain€well„recognized€legalÏrelationships€such€as€attorney€and€client,€conservator€and€ward,€and€principal€andÏagent,€the€term€also€includes€less€well„defined€relationships€where€one€party€reposesÏconfidence€in€another,€and€acts€in€reliance€upon€the€otherððs€representations.€€So€farÏas€Mr.€Thompsonððs€financial€affairs€went,€there€appears€to€be€no€evidence€of€aÏconfidential€relationship€with€Mrs.€Perry.€€She€seems€to€have€acted€only€as€Mr.ÏThompsonððs€friend€and€as€his€housekeeper,€not€as€his€financial€advisor€or€his€banker.€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àWe€further€note€that€in€òòMitchell€v.€Smithóó,€779€S.W.2d€384,€389€(Tenn.Ð h.`'* ÐApp.€1989),€this€court€stated€that€a€confidential€relationship€is€not€merely€one€ofÏmutual€trust€and€confidence,€but€oneÌÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓð ðwhere€confidence€is€placed€by€one€in€the€other€and€theÏrecipient€of€that€confidence€is€the€dominant€personality,€withÏability,€because€of€that€confidence,€to€influence€and€exerciseÏdominion€and€control€over€the€weaker€or€dominated€party.ðð€ÌÌÌÐ ¨9 26 ÐÒ€0 ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà Ø àà 0 àEven€if€we€concede,€for€the€sake€of€argument€that€the€relationshipÏbetween€Mrs.€Perry€and€Mr.€Thompson€meets€the€above€definition,€we€note€that€manyÏof€our€cases€indicate€that€proof€of€a€confidential€relationship€alone€will€not€support€aÏfinding€of€undue€influence,€unless€accompanied€by€proof€of€other€suspiciousÏcircumstances€indicative€of€such€influence.€òò€œVantrease›€v.€Carlóó,€410€S.W.2d€629,€632Ð ˆ€ Ð(Tenn.€App.€1966);€òòœTaliaferro›€v.€Greenóó,€622€S.W.2d€829,€836€(Tenn.€App.€1981).€Ð h`  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€trial€court€relied€upon€language€found€in€the€case€of€òòIn€Re€EstateÐ (  Ðof€Elamóó,€738€S.W.2d€169€(Tenn.€1987)€as€the€basis€for€its€presumption€that€Mrs.€PerryÐ  Ðexerted€undue€influence€upon€the€mind€of€the€testator:ÌÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓà ˆ àð ðIn€order€for€such€a€presumption€to€arise€there€must€beÏa€showing€that€there€were€present€the€elements€of€dominionÏand€control€by€the€stronger€over€the€weaker,€or€there€must€beÏa€showing€of€senility€or€physical€and€mental€deterioration€ofÏthe€donor€or€that€fraud€and€duress€was€involved,€or€otherÏconditions€which€would€tend€to€establish€that€the€free€agencyÏof€the€donor€was€destroyed€and€the€will€of€the€donee€wasÏsubstituted€therefor.ððÌÌñPñÒ€0 ÒñPñ738€S.W.2d€at€173,€quoting€òòKelly€v.€Allenóó,€558€S.W.2d€845€(Tenn.€1977).Ð 8"0 ÐÌÌÌœñPñÒ€0 ÒñPñ›Ò„ÒÓÓà Ø àà 0 àWhile€there€was€proof€in€the€record€that€Mr.€Thompson€had€alreadyÏsuffered€some€physical€and€mental€deterioration€at€the€time€of€the€willððs€execution,€weÏdo€not€believe€that€this€fact€is€sufficient€by€itself€to€create€a€presumption€of€undueÏinfluence,€without€some€proof€that€Mr.€Thompsonððs€infirmity€created€such€aÏdependence€upon€Mrs.€Perry€as€to€destroy€his€free€will.€€See€òòWilliamson€v.€œUpchurch›óó,Ð x-p&) Ð768€S.W.2d€265€(Tenn.€App.€1988).ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€record€showed€to€the€contrary€that€Mr.€Thompson€relied€upon€bothÏMrs.€Perry€and€Mr.€Rubley€for€many€of€his€physical€needs,€but€was€apparentlyÏindependent€enough€to€live€on€his€own,€to€do€some€of€his€own€cooking,€to€mow€hisÏyard,€and€to€build€a€closet€in€his€house.€€Despite€the€important€role€she€played€in€Mr.Ð ¸8°15 ÐThompsonððs€daily€life€from€1992€on,€there€was€no€evidence€that€Mr.€ThompsonððsÏdecision€to€make€her€his€beneficiary€was€the€product€of€anyoneððs€will€other€than€hisÏown.€€Indeed,€it€appears€that€Mr.€Thompson€was€a€person€of€strong€will,€who€wouldÏnot€tolerate€attempts€by€others€to€make€decisions€for€him.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€appellee€argues€that€a€confidential€relationship€and€undue€influenceÏcan€be€inferred€from€Mrs.€Perryððs€role€in€driving€Mr.€Thompson€to€his€lawyerððs€officeÏon€the€day€he€executed€his€will,€and€from€the€fact€that€he€subsequently€granted€herÏa€power€of€attorney.€€But€such€acts€are€not€sufficient€to€establish€a€confidentialÏrelationship,€because€they€fall€far€short€of€indicating€that€Mrs.€Perry€was€active€inÏconnection€with€the€preparation€or€the€execution€or€the€will,€or€that€she€sought€in€anyÏway€the€power€of€attorney€that€was€granted€to€her.€€See€òòœTaliaferro›€v.€Greenóó,€622Ð ¨  ÐS.W.2d€829,€836€(Tenn.€App.€1981);òò€œVantrease›€v.€Carl,óó€410€S.W.2d€636€(Tenn.€App.Ð ˆ€ Ð1966).€ÌÌà@‹‹-êàò òV.ó óˆÐ (#  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed.€€Remand€this€cause€to€theÏChancery€Court€of€œGrundy›€County€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.ÏTax€the€costs€on€appeal€to€the€œappellee.Ì›ÌÓÓà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è à____________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌœCONCUR:›ÌÌÌœ_______________________________›ÌœHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌ›ÌÌœ_______________________________›ÌœWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGE›ÌÐ  ¨9 26 ÐÑ  ÑÔ€¼·¹¼XX©DÔò òà@êê.êàœñTñIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@™™(êàAT€NASHVILLEñTñó óñTñÔ€X©DX¼¼·¹ÔˆÐ  МÌÌÌÌÌIN€RE:€BANKS€DEWEY€THOMPSONà  à)Ð ä Ü Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)ÌCHRISTINE€PERRY,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAppeal€No.Рļ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à01„A„01„9801„CH„00044Ð ´¬  Ðà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellant,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ ¤œ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àGrundy€ChanceryÐ ”Œ  ÐVS.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€94„612Ð „|  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ tl  ÐJAMES€EARL€RUBLEY,à à àà 8 àà  à)à è àReversed€andÐ d\ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àRemandedÐ TL Ðà Ø àDefendant/Appellee.à 8 àà  à)à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # àÐ D< Л̜Ô€¼·¹¼XX©DÔò òòòÌ›à@uu'êàJ€U€D€G€M€E€N€œTóóó ó›ˆÐ :2 ÐÓÓÔ€X©DX¼¼·¹Ôà Ø àœÌà Ø à›à 0 àThis€cause€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€on€appeal€from€theÏœChancery€Court›€of€œGrundy€County,›€briefs€and€argument€of€counsel;€uponÏconsideration€whereof,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€in€the€decree€of€the€ChancellorÏthere€is€œreversible€error.›Ìà Ø àà 0 àœIt›€is,€therefore,€ordered€and€decreed€by€this€Court€that€the€decree€œof€theÏChancellor€is€reversed.›€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€œChancery€Court›€of€œGrundyÏCounty›€for€œfurther€proceedings€in€accordance€with€the€opinion€filed€herein€and›€for€theÏcollection€of€the€costs€accrued€below.Ìà Ø àà 0 àCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€against€œJames€Earl€Rubley,€for€which›Ïexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓÓÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à________________________________Ìœà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àMIDDLE€SECTION›Ì̛̜à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à________________________________Ìœà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGE›Ì̛̜à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àœ________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEñTññQñÐ 0;(47 ÐñQñ›