Puckett v. Krida
Court of Appeals of Tennessee
1994 Tenn. App. LEXIS 502 (1994)
- Written by Christine Raino, JD
Facts
Following her hospitalization for Alzheimer’s disease, Nancy Porch Hooper began receiving twenty-four-hour nursing care at home, provided by Laverne Krida and Mattie Ruth Reeves (defendants). Prior to Krida and Reeves’ employment, Hooper had a positive and trusting relationship with her family and friends. Her finances were managed, without compensation, by her niece who accurately maintained Hooper’s records and made every effort to keep her promise to Hooper that she would prevent Hooper from being put in a nursing home, which was Hooper’s biggest fear. Krida and Reeves intentionally isolated Hooper from her friends and family by falsely leading Hooper to believe that her family was wasting her money and trying to put her in a nursing home. Krida took over management of Hooper’s finances. Krida and Reeves prevented Hooper’s family and friends from having contact with her by severing her pre-existing legal and financial relationships and by threatening her family with legal action. Krida also obtained an unrestricted power of attorney from Hooper. The trial court set aside the will and a deed disposing of Hooper’s property in favor of Krida and Reeves. Krida and Reeves appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lewis, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
