In re Conservatorship of Hester
Mississippi Court of Appeals
989 So. 2d 986 (2008)
- Written by Paul Neel, JD
Facts
Emma Hester (defendant) survived her husband, Elden Hester, who cared for Emma and managed her finances until his death. After Elden’s death, Emma’s son Glen lived in Emma’s home and ran a used-car lot in Emma’s front yard. Emma’s home was littered with junk and fell into disrepair. Emma rejected the help of another son, David (plaintiff). David petitioned the Chancery Court of Franklin County to appoint him conservator over Emma and her estate. A physician and psychologist examined Emma before trial. The physician found that Emma was uncertain about her finances. The psychologist found that Emma had below-average intelligence and suffered from memory loss. At trial, Emma’s guardian ad litem testified that Emma had never been capable of managing her own finances. Emma testified that she could cook for herself and take her medicine. When questioned about her finances, however, Emma could not account for several withdrawals Glen had made from their joint account and corresponding deposits he made into his personal account. Emma also did not realize that several of her monthly bills were past due. The chancery court determined that Emma was not capable of managing her financial affairs and appointed David conservator of Emma and her estate. Emma appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Carlton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.