RBC Ministries v. Tompkins

Lewis Simoneau, decedent, executed two wills. The first will was executed in September 1997 and named RBC Ministries (plaintiff) as the residual beneficiary. The second will was executed in November 2004 and named Barbara Tompkins (defendant) as the residual beneficiary. Tompkins had a confidential relationship with Simoneau, she was present at the 2004 will execution, and she arranged the witnesses for the execution. Tompkins also drafted the will herself on her home computer and was therefore aware of the will’s contents before it was executed. After the 2004 will was executed, Tompkins kept it in her possession. Tompkins submitted the 2004 will to probate and was appointed the estate’s personal representative. RBC Ministries filed a petition to revoke probate of the 2004 will in favor of the 1997 will, arguing that the 2004 will was procured by undue influence. Tompkins moved for summary judgment, arguing that RBC Ministries failed to meet its burden to prove undue influence and that she had overcome the presumption of undue influence by submitting evidence that Simoneau was coherent and aware at the time of the 2004 will’s execution. The trial court granted summary judgment, and RBC Ministries appealed, arguing that summary judgment was inappropriate because the evidence presented gave rise to the presumption of undue influence and Tompkins failed to rebut it.