Walton v. Estate of Walton
Florida District Court of Appeal
601 So. 2d 1266 (1992)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Mary Walton, decedent, executed her will in 1985. Earl Frederick Booth drafted the will and kept a photocopy after its execution. Booth disclaimed any interest in Mary’s estate. The will primarily benefitted Rodger and Dorothy Walton (plaintiffs), relatives of Mary’s late husband. Mary had four blood relatives who would have been her intestate heirs, including James Blawie (defendant). Before her death, Mary resided in a nursing home and suffered from terminal cancer. Mary was extremely physically weak but mentally sound. Marilyn Blawie, James’s wife, testified that when she visited Mary in the nursing home, Mary asked her to retrieve the will from its hiding spot in Mary’s house and hold onto it. After Mary returned home for hospice care, Marilyn testified that she visited Mary to return the will, at which time Mary expressed intent to revoke the will before tearing up the physical copy. Marilyn was the only witness to this alleged revocation. After Mary’s death, the Waltons filed a petition to establish the lost 1985 will. In support of the Waltons, Booth submitted his photocopy of the 1985 will, testified it was a correct copy, and further testified that Mary had told him approximately two weeks prior to her death she wanted her estate distributed in accordance with the 1985 will. The trial court denied the Waltons’ petition, relying on Marilyn’s testimony that Mary had destroyed the 1985 will with intent to revoke it. The Waltons appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Nesbitt, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.